Thylane Blondeau

[moi]

well, here's something a bit lighter to talk about.

Thylane Blondeau is a female model who is 10 years old. She has been featured in high profile fashion campaigns. However, there is some controversy because some think the photos are inappropriate and sexual. So I'm just wondering what people think about this. Is it an over reaction or is there no problem with the photos?

Spoiler

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/39/2011/08/medium_thylane_08_080211.jpg
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/39/2011/08/thylane_05_080211.jpg
http://data.whicdn.com/images/12230932/ThylaneBlondeau_large.jpg?1311214084
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT2yCTQWeiYYvnSeotx7i3XGpz_o2-uDFE16H6hIMj702q0S0r1
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VD3XCDkSW8s/SNPVL-JlyhI/AAAAAAAAAW0/a9E46yuFAP0/s1600/thylane.jpg

note: I don't know how old she is in each of the photos, however her current age is 10. Also, there are less provocative photos, but those aren't really an issue so I didn't link them, but here's a gallery if you're interested: http://thylaneblondeau.com/ThylaneBlondeauPics6.html

http://www.styleite.com/media/thylane-loubry-blondeau/

also here's some more info about a particular photoshoot she was in:
http://www.styleite.com/media/french-vogue-little-girls-photos/




Edit:
Just to play save, I've removed the image tag, but the links remain the same.

 

[Geoff]

I find her kinda ugly, in the same way I would someone who has plastic surgery. The face just dosn't look ... right. Not sure how to put it.
Though I tend to be distrustful of any beautiful girls. If they are pretty, they generally aren't as much inside - to my experience.
Though that's besides the point. And look at me dancing around the issue. *Dance dance dance*

Is it childporn?
No.

Is it exploitation of children by the law's definition?
Yes.

Therefore, is it ethical to have her model?
Yes.

10 year olds should be selling lemonade at a lemonade stand. Not modeling.
Let's keep in mind why we have models: To showcase the clothing first and foremost.

Are we really looking at what she's wearing or rather who's wearing it?
Bottom line: This isn't modeling.


(INB4 lolicons.)

 

[Pimp]

I definitely have a problem with those pictures and any pictures of the sort involving people under age.

It would be one thing to show a kid at natural play. But that is showing the kid off as a sex object.

Now people will say but its art, and art is all well and good if it was but that is not art. Art isn't used to sell objects i have never seen a Victoria secret commercial and said oh what artistic value that has and i never want that train of though to equate to children.

 

[Legio]

Wait, what? We'll get turned in for developing nude photos of our babies bathing at Walmart, but this is acceptable? It's not modeling, especially considering that she's practically naked in one of the photos. "Oh yeah! That's a really nice towel she's wearing! I want to buy that now!"

You know, there's a style of "artistic" "modeling" called erotica, and that's really what this reminds me of, but just with a MUCH younger subject. I personally have no problem with children modeling in the traditional sense or participating in beauty pageants (though I do think they're both bad parenting choices,) but this is simply using a child as a sexual object.

So yes, in my opinion, the photos are inappropriate and unacceptable, both from an ethical standpoint and a societal standpoint. Furthermore, they serve no purpose but to enable and desensitize society to pedophilia and child pornography. (Note that I'm not saying they are CP.)

 

[-lexus-]

What, this is erotic? IVe seen 2 pictures of her not wearing anything topside, and in one she covered it up with her hair. And I think neither of the pictures are erotic, nor does she look like a sexual object to me.

On top of that, I dont think that one of the Vogue shoot was meant to sell clothes. I thought it was to make a point. Wasnt Vogue also the one to have half naked models dressed up as soldiers having sex using the American flag as a blanket?

Meh, if anything, I think its ridiculous from the parents. She has been modeling at 4, so that likely means she has some very pushy parents.

 

[Legio]

I'm not saying it's erotic, but isn't it trying to be 'sexy'? If not the two mentioned, then certainly most of the others. And my point is that this desensitizes the world to this sort of thing. It starts out with little things. First you have 10 year olds posing "seductively." And at first this is rejected, but the more people are exposed to it, the less they seem to mind. And then it snowballs into worse and worse things. Certainly, there's a point at which society won't become any less sensitive, but if society reaches that point with this subject, that's a bad time indeed.

And what point were they trying to make exactly? I could see where this could be somewhat redeeming and certainly an interesting debate, so enlighten us. :3

Agreed on the parents being ridiculous.

 

[Arachna]

Oh my god.

You know i bet The fashion industries had not heard of a pedophiles. They probably think that is something for eating.

And the parents. I would take their child away from them. Seriously. Pushing a child in that kind of a world? It makes me roar. =.= They don't desrve a child. rawr.

 

[-lexus-]

I'm not saying it's erotic, but isn't it trying to be 'sexy'? If not the two mentioned, then certainly most of the others. And my point is that this desensitizes the world to this sort of thing. It starts out with little things. First you have 10 year olds posing "seductively." And at first this is rejected, but the more people are exposed to it, the less they seem to mind. And then it snowballs into worse and worse things. Certainly, there's a point at which society won't become any less sensitive, but if society reaches that point with this subject, that's a bad time indeed.

And what point were they trying to make exactly? I could see where this could be somewhat redeeming and certainly an interesting debate, so enlighten us. :3

Agreed on the parents being ridiculous.

It was in one of the links provided in the OP

Thylane was introduced via a series of images, all of which were pulled from the same spread: that controversial editorial from the Tom Ford issue of Vogue Paris featuring a trio of little girls modeling grown up clothing, jewels, and makeup. While we found the images somewhat creepy, it’s safe to assume Carine Roitfeld was trying to provoke and, more importantly, make a point: that most models working today are in their early teens — they’re as much children as, well, actual children.

Now how much younger are they, according to that site.

And that’s the angle that GMA missed. George Stephanopoulos admits that most models are young, but we’re not sure he realizes how young, especially when he compares Thylane’s poses to “the sultry stares of much older models.” We’d hardly call 14 — the average age at which most models get discovered and start working — “much” older.

http://www.styleite.com/media/thylane-loubry-blondeau/

People are fine with 14, and not with 10? Why, whats the major difference? To me the difference between 10 and 14 seems completely arbitrary.

 

[Core]

I have to say I dont care. She does not turn me or nor do her looks or poses do anything for me.
Therefore I dont find it sexual or exploitative if she chooses to do that and there are people that consider it art. Its art. simple as that.
There are plenty of nude women in art history that have not been found sexual on murals of churches and chapels.

I think met-art has a higher controversy rating then her in particular but seriously the things that pass for art since MODERN art became the new thing.. well lets not get into that

I have to say.. I agree with.. and i cant believe the words are coming out of my mouth.... Lexus
Those that find fault with art due to nudity and age.. have more personal issues or.. a society of dogma of issues.. then full understanding what art is.
Were not talking about sexual acts were talking about imagery.
The people that complain it is sexual and offensive... DONT EVER GO TO A BEACH! EVER! ive seen more underage pootytang running from their mothers in the nude that OH MY GOD WE NEED TO ARREST THOSE PEOPLE!

 

[Arachna]

I have to say I dont care. She does not turn me or nor do her looks or poses do anything for me.!

Are you a pedobear? I was sure you aren't.

Therefore I dont find it sexual or exploitative if she chooses to do that and there are people that consider it art. Its art. simple as that.
There are plenty of nude women in art history that have not been found sexual on murals of churches and chapels.

<.< I am sorry but i don't remember seeing Michelangelo or Leonardo da Vinci painting pictures of nude children with make up, on the church walls and floors.
By your definition of art. I can go out on the beach . Take nude pictures of kids and say : "Look it is art!".....yey!

I think met-art has a higher controversy rating then her in particular but seriously the things that pass for art since MODERN art became the new thing.. well lets not get into that

I don't see met art as a form of art.Call me stubborn.But every day people can do that at home any day. Where for example barock art style is full of nude people.The difference is in the gift.Now any person can take a camera and make snap shots.I am so happy about it i could puke.

Those that find fault with art due to nudity and age.. have more personal issues or.. a society of dogma of issues.. then full understanding what art is.
Were not talking about sexual acts were talking about imagery.
The people that complain it is sexual and offensive... DONT EVER GO TO A BEACH! EVER! ive seen more underage pootytang running from their mothers in the nude that OH MY GOD WE NEED TO ARREST THOSE PEOPLE!

I am sorry Core. But the thing you said makes no sense.I can agree that the human body is a wonderful object. It is mysterious.It is really hard to draw.And it is unique in the eyes of the artist.
However.If you think about in what kind of disgusting world we live in. Would you push your child,from the age of 4 years old. Into a world of anorexia.Disparagement of human beauty, and compaction of the complex to women and children working in this kind of industry?Come on. Think about it.

I can agree with the "beach" thing. In any case.

 

[Core]

Are you a pedobear? I was sure you aren't.



<.< I am sorry but i don't remember seeing Michelangelo or Leonardo da Vinci painting pictures of nude children with make up, on the church walls and floors.
By your definition of art. I can go out on the beach . Take nude pictures of kids and say : "Look it is art!".....yey!


I don't see met art as a form of art.Call me stubborn.But every day people can do that at home any day. Where for example barock art style is full of nude people.The difference is in the gift.Now any person can take a camera and make snap shots.I am so happy about it i could puke.




I am sorry Core. But the thing you said makes no sense.I can agree that the human body is a wonderful object. It is mysterious.It is really hard to draw.And it is unique in the eyes of the artist.
However.If you think about in what kind of disgusting world we live in. Would you push your child,from the age of 4 years old. Into a world of anorexia.Disparagement of human beauty, and compaction of the complex to women and children working in this kind of industry?Come on. Think about it.

I can agree with the "beach" thing. In any case.

You said it yourself its the artist's rendition of what he defines as art... you dont have to agree with it at all And yes.. you can goto the beach take pictures and call it art.. there are no rules on art.. if you think we need them simply say so.
But your arguments tell me that what you define as art comes from a very narrow vision of society's moral code.
You claim the artists of old didnt paint nude children back then.. this is not true its just not in their FAMOUS PAINTINGS! and back then the era you referred to.... broader heavier set women were the ideal image of fertility... not barren tiny flatchested children.

But lets go back to the greeks.... Come on.. lets go lets hear your great explanation for why the greeks never worshipped the nude form of underage children.(100% sarcasm)

Your definition of art is limited to that which you believe is DEFINED as art in a museum. Art by definition is:
Wiki:

Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music, literature, film, photography, sculpture, and paintings. The meaning of art is explored in a branch of philosophy known as aesthetics, and even disciplines such as history and psychology analyze its relationship with humans and generations.
Traditionally, the term art was used to refer to any skill or mastery. This conception changed during the Romantic period, when art came to be seen as "a special faculty of the human mind to be classified with religion and science".[1] Generally, art is made with the intention of stimulating thoughts and emotions.

Dictionary:
art 1 (ärt)n.1. Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.
2. a. The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
b. The study of these activities.
c. The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group.

3. High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
4. A field or category of art, such as music, ballet, or literature.
5. A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
6. a. A system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities: the art of building.
b. A trade or craft that applies such a system of principles and methods: the art of the lexicographer.

7. a. Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.
b. Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties: "Self-criticism is an art not many are qualified to practice" (Joyce Carol Oates).

8. a. arts Artful devices, stratagems, and tricks.
b. Artful contrivance; cunning.

9. Printing Illustrative material.


If you look at the dictionary definition then thefirst point is: 1. Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.

In its most basic form humans are nature. Therefore art, regardless of their age.

dont screw with me -.- I am not hindered by your morals and your view of what the ethical code of conduct should be.
<3

 

[Lovely.]

O.O Well I don't find it sexual or anything, I just see a really young kid dressing up in adult clothing. >_________> Though I really don't support ppl making 10 yr olds models. I mean they really don't know anything, it's just their parents making them. All it does it makes them more obbessive with their looks than nessary. >___> They're only 10 years old, let them have a somewhat normal life without having to worry about their looks. >__> I mean seriously, so many models are anorexic and have all these disorders, having little kids in the industry will only make them more prone to doing such things when they get older.

 

[Core]

O.O Well I don't find it sexual or anything, I just see a really young kid dressing up in adult clothing. >_________> Though I really don't support ppl making 10 yr olds models. I mean they really don't know anything, it's just their parents making them. All it does it makes them more obbessive with their looks than nessary. >___> They're only 10 years old, let them have a somewhat normal life without having to worry about their looks. >__> I mean seriously, so many models are anorexic and have all these disorders, having little kids in the industry will only make them more prone to doing such things when they get older.

In my original post I specifically said "if they choose to" Parents forcing them, allowing them, wanting etc... that was never the question Still the moral implications of parents "living through their kids" and condoning or even pushing them in that direction is an entirely different social implication

 

[Arachna]

You said it yourself its the artist's rendition of what he defines as art... you dont have to agree with it at all And yes.. you can goto the beach take pictures and call it art.. there are no rules on art.. if you think we need them simply say so.
But your arguments tell me that what you define as art comes from a very narrow vision of society's moral code.

Feel free to say i have a narrow vision. But seriously. Art does not comply to any society's moral code. That is just silly.
I am simply saying i don't see this kind of "art" as art.
No need to get angry. Really.
I mean. Just look at modern art as such.

You claim the artists of old didnt paint nude children back then.. this is not true its just not in their FAMOUS PAINTINGS! and back then the era you referred to.... broader heavier set women were the ideal image of fertility... not barren tiny flatchested children.

I think you misunderstood what i am saying.
I am saying this is art :

Spoiler

And this is not art :

Spoiler

it is just selling cosmetics by using her as an item. ;>.>;

But lets go back to the greeks.... Come on.. lets go lets hear your great explanation for why the greeks never worshipped the nude form of underage children.(100% sarcasm)

Cccc.. i did not say that. Actually i said they did. Pst...and if we are speaking of Greeks.Ever heard of : paederasty?
I rest my case about it.

Your definition of art is limited to that which you believe is DEFINED as art in a museum. Art by definition is:

Spoiler

Wiki:

Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music, literature, film, photography, sculpture, and paintings. The meaning of art is explored in a branch of philosophy known as aesthetics, and even disciplines such as history and psychology analyze its relationship with humans and generations.
Traditionally, the term art was used to refer to any skill or mastery. This conception changed during the Romantic period, when art came to be seen as "a special faculty of the human mind to be classified with religion and science".[1] Generally, art is made with the intention of stimulating thoughts and emotions.

Dictionary:
art 1 (ärt)n.1. Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.
2. a. The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
b. The study of these activities.
c. The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group.

3. High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
4. A field or category of art, such as music, ballet, or literature.
5. A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
6. a. A system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities: the art of building.
b. A trade or craft that applies such a system of principles and methods: the art of the lexicographer.

7. a. Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.
b. Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties: "Self-criticism is an art not many are qualified to practice" (Joyce Carol Oates).

8. a. arts Artful devices, stratagems, and tricks.
b. Artful contrivance; cunning.

9. Printing Illustrative material.

If you look at the dictionary definition then thefirst point is: 1. Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.

You are kinda talking to the person that actually studied history of art. And there for i do know about what i am talking about.
This kind of "art" is really same as this kind of art :

Spoiler

It can be done by a kid of 5 years. It sells also really good. The worth is around 500$.
Would you pay for that? is that art for you? Of course it is. Socity as you say has said : "That is also art." So yey for the society as such.
Cos it is alllllll art. Right?

In its most basic form humans are nature. Therefore art, regardless of their age.

dont screw with me -.- I am not hindered by your morals and your view of what the ethical code of conduct should be.
<3

Hey i am not arguing that. Even prehistoric handprints on the cave walls is regarded as art. :shrug:
Who am i to say it isn't right? lol

To be hindered or not to be hindered. That is the HUGE question.What ever floats your boat is fine by me. Just don't place me in the same basket as them and i am alll fine. :grin:

And mehz. You know i do it with love. And <3

 

[Core]

Feel free to say i have a narrow vision. But seriously. Art does not comply to any society's moral code. That is just silly.
I am simply saying i don't see this kind of "art" as art.
No need to get angry. Really.
I mean. Just look at modern art as such.


I think you misunderstood what i am saying.
I am saying this is art :

Spoiler

And this is not art :

Spoiler

it is just selling cosmetics by using her as an item. ;>.>;



Cccc.. i did not say that. Actually i said they did. Pst...and if we are speaking of Greeks.Ever heard of : paederasty?
I rest my case about it.




You are kinda talking to the person that actually studied history of art. And there for i do know about what i am talking about.
This kind of "art" is really same as this kind of art :

Spoiler

It can be done by a kid of 5 years. It sells also really good. The worth is around 500$.
Would you pay for that? is that art for you? Of course it is. Socity as you say has said : "That is also art." So yey for the society as such.
Cos it is alllllll art. Right?




Hey i am not arguing that. Even prehistoric handprints on the cave walls is regarded as art. :shrug:
Who am i to say it isn't right? lol

To be hindered or not to be hindered. That is the HUGE question.What ever floats your boat is fine by me. Just don't place me in the same basket as them and i am alll fine. :grin:

And mehz. You know i do it with love. And <3

Now were just arguing taste... as fart as I can tell by matter of definition: art is like(not is) beauty... It completely depends on who is beholding it.


I am not saying you were wrong in the slightest but in your original post to me you said specifically:

However.If you think about in what kind of disgusting world we live in. Would you push your child,from the age of 4 years old. Into a world of anorexia.Disparagement of human beauty, and compaction of the complex to women and children working in this kind of industry?Come on. Think about it.

Which is why I responded in the way that I did. Its an entirely different social implication... Everything is and can be art. Whether or not society or you have any problems with it.. is something else entirely.

Anywho enough about the definition I have one final question.
You have on multiple occasions now taken a personal offense to what I said in the sense that you dont like to be lumped into groups.. you realize half the time YOU is not YOU but people in general. If you dont wish to be human or if you wish to be speshul then I would advise you dont act neo-conformist when being lumped into a category
I am trying to be lighthearted here even though text does not do it any justice.

 

[Arachna]

Why would i even think about it?Groups,part of a sub groups/society....lalalala. :shrug:
I don't wanna even worry about it.It is not something that interests me. But if you wanna put me somewhere in a group. Go ahead. As i said. What ever floats your boat.
I am sick of people saying : "I am this. But you are that. And he is "this". But acting like "this." Boring. :shrug: Nite : i don't take it personally i just find it annoying as hell.
Lets all go be hippie. <3 Core You know what i mean.

I am human. I can not help it or change it. So there for there is nothing i can say about it.Why would i ?
Text always do it justice. And you are good in reading between lines.

 

[Core]

Why would i even think about it?Groups,part of a sub groups/society....lalalala. :shrug:
I don't wanna even worry about it.It is not something that interests me. But if you wanna put me somewhere in a group. Go ahead. As i said. What ever floats your boat.
I am sick of people saying : "I am this. But you are that. And he is "this". But acting like "this." Boring. :shrug: Nite : i don't take it personally i just find it annoying as hell.
Lets all go be hippie. <3 Core You know what i mean.

I am human. I can not help it or change it. So there for there is nothing i can say about it.Why would i ?
Text always do it justice. And you are good in reading between lines.

Really am I? Surely you jest! I cannot now or ever will admit I am good at anything! muahahhahaa <3

 

[Zero Phoenix]

I have to say I dont care. She does not turn me or nor do her looks or poses do anything for me.

Are you a pedophile Core?

Therefore I dont find it sexual or exploitative if she chooses to do that and there are people that consider it art. Its art. simple as that.

How is it art?

There are plenty of nude women in art history that have not been found sexual on murals of churches and chapels.

That's because they're portraying the human form as art. This is borderline child pornography. The laws are different in France though so eh.

I have to say.. I agree with.. and i cant believe the words are coming out of my mouth.... Lexus
Those that find fault with art due to nudity and age.. have more personal issues or.. a society of dogma of issues.. then full understanding what art is.

Hey Arachna, did you know pedophiles always use that defense when they're brought up on charges?

Were not talking about sexual acts were talking about imagery.

Sexual imagery? ;?;

The people that complain it is sexual and offensive... DONT EVER GO TO A BEACH! EVER! ive seen more underage pootytang running from their mothers in the nude that OH MY GOD WE NEED TO ARREST THOSE PEOPLE!

Difference is kids at a beach usually wear more clothing. ;>.>;

 

[-lexus-]

[MENTION=170]Zero Phoenix[/MENTION], the art is not the person in the image itself, but the message that has been tried to be conveyed here through the image.

 

[Zero Phoenix]

@Zero Phoenix, the art is not the person in the image itself, but the message that has been tried to be conveyed here through the image.

And what about the message is artistic? When I see these pics I don't think it's sending the message that the human body is beautiful. This pics would be risque for an adult and they're certainly inappropriate for a child but you think they're conveying an artistic message. Fascinating.