4 ms·

> 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

> 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.
        p0pcult 4y ago
        It's funny to keep trying to convince people you are a "real pedophile" (TM). In particular, with a zero-day account. I don't merely question the veracity of your feelings; I am calling your entire account (both the literal user account, and also the retelling of your stories) fiction. It's also very suspect that you picked "Cuties" which was the prior round of moral outrage; it is almost as though, rather than being a "real pedophile" (TM) you are just sifting through Tucker Carlson's satanic panics to make provocative points that suit whatever weird agenda you have. Lastly (and I do mean lastly, as after this, I'm done engaging you in discourse) it's interesting that you're sweating me, specifically. Every single comment on your fake identity "real pedophile" (TM) 4 hour old account is in response to me.
  - mc32 4y ago
    Not necessarily but they would talk about "normalizing" and advancing certain unwelcome attitudes and behavior. Let's say they "recreated" a Srebernica scene -it would certainly be controversial. No one would accuse them of massacring the actors --less so if they used CGI --but never the less is it would be considered beyond the pale and would be denounced by virtually everyone and for good reason. It's gross. It's repugnant. What they did was and is repugnant as well.
    - p0pcult 4y ago
      My only horse in this particular race is that--repugnant or not--this ad campaign does not constitute pedophilia, grooming, pedophilia normalization, or the like, as is claimed (for example) in the sibling to your comment: >Just like the Balencia [sic] photos constitute pedophilia flirting with ritual abuse. Furthermore, that, these moral panics are dangerous and (specifically in this case), constitute attempts at stochastic terrorism and political destabilization.
      - mc32 4y ago
        We'll have to disagree.
        p0pcult 4y ago
        Ceci n'est pas un pipe.
      - naturedaily 4y ago
        I agree that moral panics are undesirable. But by saying "these" you imply that this is all this is: a moral panic. You would have to be able to see this as more than just panic, or you will deem anyone in this debate under the spell of moral panic. You then cannot accept good faith on counterarguments. This is not pragmatic. Yes, polarization is used to pit right against left. We could all join hands on this: It is repugnant to use vulnerable children for marketing that reeks of pedophilia. Do not focus on those screaming global cabal of satanist abusers, and certainly do not make it representative of the position of your political opposition. How far are you willing to go to concede on this topic? Or should we let such politicized events destabilize us without a fight (through debate).
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.

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.
      - p0pcult 4y ago
        It's funny to keep trying to convince people you are a "real pedophile" (TM). In particular, with a zero-day account. I don't merely question the veracity of your feelings; I am calling your entire account (both the literal user account, and also the retelling of your stories) fiction. It's also very suspect that you picked "Cuties" which was the prior round of moral outrage; it is almost as though, rather than being a "real pedophile" (TM) you are just sifting through Tucker Carlson's satanic panics to make provocative points that suit whatever weird agenda you have. Lastly (and I do mean lastly, as after this, I'm done engaging you in discourse) it's interesting that you're sweating me, specifically. Every single comment on your fake identity "real pedophile" (TM) 4 hour old account is in response to me.
- mc32 4y ago
  Not necessarily but they would talk about "normalizing" and advancing certain unwelcome attitudes and behavior. Let's say they "recreated" a Srebernica scene -it would certainly be controversial. No one would accuse them of massacring the actors --less so if they used CGI --but never the less is it would be considered beyond the pale and would be denounced by virtually everyone and for good reason. It's gross. It's repugnant. What they did was and is repugnant as well.
  - p0pcult 4y ago
    My only horse in this particular race is that--repugnant or not--this ad campaign does not constitute pedophilia, grooming, pedophilia normalization, or the like, as is claimed (for example) in the sibling to your comment: >Just like the Balencia [sic] photos constitute pedophilia flirting with ritual abuse. Furthermore, that, these moral panics are dangerous and (specifically in this case), constitute attempts at stochastic terrorism and political destabilization.
    - mc32 4y ago
      We'll have to disagree.
      - p0pcult 4y ago
        Ceci n'est pas un pipe.
    - naturedaily 4y ago
      I agree that moral panics are undesirable. But by saying "these" you imply that this is all this is: a moral panic. You would have to be able to see this as more than just panic, or you will deem anyone in this debate under the spell of moral panic. You then cannot accept good faith on counterarguments. This is not pragmatic. Yes, polarization is used to pit right against left. We could all join hands on this: It is repugnant to use vulnerable children for marketing that reeks of pedophilia. Do not focus on those screaming global cabal of satanist abusers, and certainly do not make it representative of the position of your political opposition. How far are you willing to go to concede on this topic? Or should we let such politicized events destabilize us without a fight (through debate).

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.