4 ms·

I mean the fashion show is just the typical haute couture nonsense. But I did look up the instagram profile you're talking about and saw one of the images in g

I mean the fashion show is just the typical haute couture nonsense. But I did look up the instagram profile you're talking about and saw one of the images in google's cache. I'll save other people the trouble of doing the same: it's a little kid taped into a chair with packing tape, including over their mouth, and they're wearing headphones connected to a laptop showing some sort of tv show. It's not CSAM but it certainly is intended to ape it stylistically, which I find incredibly poor taste.

MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> which I find incredibly poor taste. I wonder if that's the point. Fashion is all about pushing boundaries/generating buzz/publicity, right? I'm not saying I agree with it. I just don't think anybody would be talking about Balenciaga on HackerNews if they weren't being quite literally as edgy as possible/pushing the boundaries as hard as possible. If all of this ends up increasing sales/brand image in one twisted way or another, will they call it a net win and go back to being a sleeping giant until they fabricate/drum up the next "scandal"?
- influx 4y ago
  Pushing images of simulated child abuse to sell shoes should be beyond the limits of what society accepts. Art can continue to push boundaries without kids. It’s sick this even needs to be said.
- mc32 4y ago
  Do you think they'll go for the same but instead use stereotypical imagery of starving children or POWs? I bet they do not because yes, it'll create lots of "controversy" but also many advocacy organizations will come down on them like a ton of bricks.
  - p0pcult 4y ago
    Of course you're right, but let's continue the thought experiment: if they had used some of the imagery you suggest, would anyone claim that the people taking the photos were starving said children, or imprisoning people?
    - naturedaily 4y ago
      This is not what is claimed, at least, not by the reasonable people opposed to such marketing. The photos would constitute gore. Just like the Balencia photos constitute pedophilia flirting with ritual abuse. The photographer is just pushing aside blame. They knew damn well what they were depicting when they checked the light values on the dog bowls and discarded adult clothing placed on the floor of a child's room. The photographer still says the pushback in general is way overblown, and that people repulsed by these images are overreacting. They know what they did, they just donnot see a problem with it. That is how normal such shoots are these days at the higher levels of the fashion and modeling industry. What would you expect of someone who takes photos of starving children in a bright Beneton shirt?
      - p0pcult 4y ago
        >Balencia [sic]
        naturedaily 4y ago
        The photoshoot included a roll of police tape with the sic: Baalencia. With Baal they were referring to Lord Moloch, a pagan God who demanded child sacrifice by casting these in the fires of a horned bull statue. So the fashion and modeling industry. They depict the demon. Youth and Beauty sacrificed at the altar of Lord Moloch. Maybe the photos are meant as a warning or a way to offset karmic debt. > I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/49303/howl https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/49303/howl > who says this? Someone who actually believes in free speech, not faux-free speech or faux-satanism. It is improbable, yes, even for those who talk a lot about free speech and satanism. > So you're saying I said what I said. These shoots, and the movie Cuties, invoked a pedophilic attraction in me. I do not think that was purely imagination, nor do I appreciate being questioned about the veracity of my feelings by someome who was not born for this path. > tell us more about the viewers, based on their reactions, than about the photography itself? I do not get this attraction to a photo of a milk carton. The photography itself certainly plays a role. The more you can identify with the photographer, in regards to boundaries and tastes and attractions, the more a photo will resonate with you.
- scruple 4y ago
  They can dress up what they're doing in whatever language they want, like calling it "art" or whatever, but at the end of the day this is a company whose business is selling clothing. It strikes me as tasteless, or maybe even plain vulgar, to use imagery like this to try to sell clothing. Wasn't the first time, won't be the last, but I'm glad they're getting dragged for it all the same.

MuffinFlavored 4y ago

> which I find incredibly poor taste. I wonder if that's the point. Fashion is all about pushing boundaries/generating buzz/publicity, right? I'm not saying I agree with it. I just don't think anybody would be talking about Balenciaga on HackerNews if they weren't being quite literally as edgy as possible/pushing the boundaries as hard as possible. If all of this ends up increasing sales/brand image in one twisted way or another, will they call it a net win and go back to being a sleeping giant until they fabricate/drum up the next "scandal"?

influx 4y ago
Pushing images of simulated child abuse to sell shoes should be beyond the limits of what society accepts. Art can continue to push boundaries without kids. It’s sick this even needs to be said.
mc32 4y ago
Do you think they'll go for the same but instead use stereotypical imagery of starving children or POWs? I bet they do not because yes, it'll create lots of "controversy" but also many advocacy organizations will come down on them like a ton of bricks.
- p0pcult 4y ago
  Of course you're right, but let's continue the thought experiment: if they had used some of the imagery you suggest, would anyone claim that the people taking the photos were starving said children, or imprisoning people?
  - naturedaily 4y ago
    This is not what is claimed, at least, not by the reasonable people opposed to such marketing. The photos would constitute gore. Just like the Balencia photos constitute pedophilia flirting with ritual abuse. The photographer is just pushing aside blame. They knew damn well what they were depicting when they checked the light values on the dog bowls and discarded adult clothing placed on the floor of a child's room. The photographer still says the pushback in general is way overblown, and that people repulsed by these images are overreacting. They know what they did, they just donnot see a problem with it. That is how normal such shoots are these days at the higher levels of the fashion and modeling industry. What would you expect of someone who takes photos of starving children in a bright Beneton shirt?
    - p0pcult 4y ago
      >Balencia [sic]
      - naturedaily 4y ago
        The photoshoot included a roll of police tape with the sic: Baalencia. With Baal they were referring to Lord Moloch, a pagan God who demanded child sacrifice by casting these in the fires of a horned bull statue. So the fashion and modeling industry. They depict the demon. Youth and Beauty sacrificed at the altar of Lord Moloch. Maybe the photos are meant as a warning or a way to offset karmic debt. > I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/49303/howl https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/49303/howl > who says this? Someone who actually believes in free speech, not faux-free speech or faux-satanism. It is improbable, yes, even for those who talk a lot about free speech and satanism. > So you're saying I said what I said. These shoots, and the movie Cuties, invoked a pedophilic attraction in me. I do not think that was purely imagination, nor do I appreciate being questioned about the veracity of my feelings by someome who was not born for this path. > tell us more about the viewers, based on their reactions, than about the photography itself? I do not get this attraction to a photo of a milk carton. The photography itself certainly plays a role. The more you can identify with the photographer, in regards to boundaries and tastes and attractions, the more a photo will resonate with you.
scruple 4y ago
They can dress up what they're doing in whatever language they want, like calling it "art" or whatever, but at the end of the day this is a company whose business is selling clothing. It strikes me as tasteless, or maybe even plain vulgar, to use imagery like this to try to sell clothing. Wasn't the first time, won't be the last, but I'm glad they're getting dragged for it all the same.