I hate to say it, but this article is so judgmental. It presumes that someone knows better than these models' parents. . When in fact, their (young models) inner strength, character, is determined by their role models--likely their parents--and not by the designer clothing they wear for work. If people look at them in a wrong way, the problem is more with the people who are looking like, this than with the models themselves, or what they are doing. They are displaying (by wearing) a designers art. I'd rather let the models and parents decide what to do, rather than sit here judging their decisions --that are theirs to make. And incidentally, teach your children not to be judgmental and respect the decisions of others.
3
All I can say is 'Uncle Karl'...ewhh...find some models that are age appropriate for your designs...I just have to say when I see these super young models- where are your parents! Neither Lily Rose or Kaia need the money for their college fund..So why? It seems wrong on so many levels...
13
65-year-old Caitlyn Jenner is more beautiful and representative of the bodies of my generation than a styled 13-year-old girl.
8
Question the logic of using a 14 year old GIRL as the face of CHANEL. WOMEN buy Chanel, not adolescents.
14
When I was 13 in the early 60's I remember how jealous I was of one of my best friends, because her mother ( she had been an ice skating star in show biz) used to nag her not to leave the house without lipstick, while my mom wouldn't allow any lipstick (colored nail polish etc.) until much later. My friend was a happy-go-lucky tomboy who had no interest in makeup and her mom used to drive her crazy by constantly wanting her to dress up and be something she was not. I'm grateful now that my mom never pushed me to grow up too fast no matter how much of a hurry I was in. Times may be different now, but surely tarting up young teenage girls in full makeup and sexy dresses can never be a good idea whatever the era. Where are the parents?
20
As a student in the industry, it is disheartening to see these young girls on the runway for many reasons. In the industry there are a lot of shady acts that can certainly take advantage of their youth and naivety, as Kate Moss illustrated in her description of being 16 and uncomfortable with certain aspects of her work. Secondly, it gives such a false perception of what it takes to become a high fashion model, young girls, such as the many young women who are recruited from Russia and many other countries, will come to America with these set goals that have such a high chance of pure failure. That leaves them left in compromising positions, no money and no help. I don't want for these young girls to believe that, mainly because many of the teens on the runways and in editorials, got their jobs solely through nepotism, and being "Hollywood Royalty", which is another unrealistic expectation for the average girl. Lastly, I just find it odd that these designers desire these models, I'm not quite sure why they would want models displaying their clothes on people who are completely out of their target demographic. As a whole, I just wish this would all end, thankfully there are laws and regulations that will protect them to an extent, but even then, it all just seems like a shady and peculiar narrative that has gone on far too long.
23
So many of the comments below going on about how thin and shapeless the runway models are, how vacant their expressions. There is actually a simple reason for this.
These women are essentially living mannequins. Their sole purpose is to model the clothes. Anything that would distract from that -- emotional expression, curves -- sends the eye away from the material & cut to the woman wearing it.
Within the context of its industry, it makes sense.
These women are essentially living mannequins. Their sole purpose is to model the clothes. Anything that would distract from that -- emotional expression, curves -- sends the eye away from the material & cut to the woman wearing it.
Within the context of its industry, it makes sense.
14
Thank you VANESSA FRIEDMAN for writing and NYT for publishing this great piece of substance and decency! We need profound depth as shown in Ms. Friedman's article for both fashion consumers of all levels and for culture of our society, here and now.
That's why I love reading NYT Fashion section which has a real voice in fashion world. Thursday Style and Sunday Style are my favorites in fashion journalism.
Bravo!
That's why I love reading NYT Fashion section which has a real voice in fashion world. Thursday Style and Sunday Style are my favorites in fashion journalism.
Bravo!
7
The constantly self-referential cycle of these same news stories is breathtaking. As an older Black woman, I hope to never hear another story about having another "discussion" about race relations. Similarly, we are dredging up the same stories about child models that I've been reading since I was a 60s "fashionista" seeing Twiggy in ads. Yes, I think both stories are important, but I don't think either subject is absorbed by our increasingly short attention span public. We read this stuff and feel shocked (or not), wait another decade and read the same stuff again. While it's a great career track for fledgling "journalists," I'm still waiting for serious and permanent change by a public both appalled and fascinated by the same sad states of affairs. Basta!
12
I think a good way to stop the designers from pimping children as sex objects in their runway shows, is to apply child pornography laws to any photo of a girl/boy under 18, in nude or semi-nude attire. This would include live streaming of shows, all photos posted to Instagram,etc. on the internet,and of course all newspapers,magazines, tv/reality shows,etc. If it puts a designer/whomever behind bars, that could finally stop this tawdry practice.
20
One of the advantages I have as an artist is that I can design a model's face and body in an illustration to look any age or physical condition. Since fashion "is in essence an industry based on deception" and on promises that "if you wear this you will look better/cooler/thinner/taller/more powerful than you really are”, we've little recourse than to maintain the practice of illusion. The issues are consumers who desire (and will pay for) a certain appearance and the resources we have to work with: models (human beings) who, naturally, age.
1
It's "fashion" that nobody really (as in, real people) wear. Models? Yes. The rich? Yes. Celebrities? Yes. Real people? NO.
We don't just need to move on from pre-pubescent models. We need to move on from the idea that fashion matters.
It doesn't.
We don't just need to move on from pre-pubescent models. We need to move on from the idea that fashion matters.
It doesn't.
14
Fashion is art, and so for me, it absolutely matters.
Embroiderista, I have a hard time believing that you really think that fashion doesn't matter. I'm assuming you are into embroidery, which is a beautiful art and also one of my favorite details in garments; it is one of the ways I express myself in design. I like the intricacies and how you can get lost in the details.
Sure, maybe only the wealthy can purchase garments that would be deemed "artistic," like those with heavy embroidery or luxurious fabrics. Then again, not all of us can afford a Renoir. Somehow, real people can still appreciate the painting and find inspiration to express themselves -- something we all do, every day, from the status update on Facebook to the skin we choose, clothing.
Embroiderista, I have a hard time believing that you really think that fashion doesn't matter. I'm assuming you are into embroidery, which is a beautiful art and also one of my favorite details in garments; it is one of the ways I express myself in design. I like the intricacies and how you can get lost in the details.
Sure, maybe only the wealthy can purchase garments that would be deemed "artistic," like those with heavy embroidery or luxurious fabrics. Then again, not all of us can afford a Renoir. Somehow, real people can still appreciate the painting and find inspiration to express themselves -- something we all do, every day, from the status update on Facebook to the skin we choose, clothing.
10
It matters to me too. What I wear reflects how I feel about myself and the act of creating a daily 'look' for myself is the only creative outlet I have. That said, using children as models is disgusting. And Cindy Crawford, have you no shame? Weren't you a high school valedictorian? You should be smarter than that.
10
In any other industry, Catholic Church included, this would be pornography – appealing to one's "prurient interests" – and child abuse. Would anyone charged with having sex with any of the girls pictured in this piece not have been fooled into thinking he was with a consenting, even if young "adult"?
"The Devil made me do it."*
"I can resist everything except temptation." ~ OSCAR WILDE
* Origin for bible totelers: When God asks Adam and Eve what they have done, they blamed "the other guy". Adam says Eve made him do it; Eve says the devil made her do it.
"The Devil made me do it."*
"I can resist everything except temptation." ~ OSCAR WILDE
* Origin for bible totelers: When God asks Adam and Eve what they have done, they blamed "the other guy". Adam says Eve made him do it; Eve says the devil made her do it.
8
Now if there only was an Adam and Eve. I think this stuff is silly.
2
"People seem to be offended by facts, or what used to be called truth."
~ FRANCIS BACON
(1909 - 1992)
Irish born British artist
~ FRANCIS BACON
(1909 - 1992)
Irish born British artist
3
You can make any girl over 12 look like an adult; pimps do it all the time. It does not make it right.
You cannot tell me that there are not enough 18+ models to represent designers/fashion/cosmetic companies.
I am quite surprised at Cindy Crawford who generally seems like a level-headed person. Her daughter looks quite tarted up.
Yes, fashion is an allusion but it could be a very dangerous one for a child. And that's what these girls are - still children.
You cannot tell me that there are not enough 18+ models to represent designers/fashion/cosmetic companies.
I am quite surprised at Cindy Crawford who generally seems like a level-headed person. Her daughter looks quite tarted up.
Yes, fashion is an allusion but it could be a very dangerous one for a child. And that's what these girls are - still children.
17
what makes you think crawford is anything but shallow?
6
I think using the very young in this fashion harms everyone. The young models themselves get pushed into a time of life they are not ready for, and results in them thinking of themselves as mere objects.
But it harms older women as well. An older woman is beautiful for what she is, and at the same time these very young models are pushed forward into a time of life they are unprepared for, older women are being pushed backward to a time of life that is passed for them, and which will not return.
Fashion is meant to enhance beauty, but here it seems that almost everyone, instead of enhancing and celebrating the beauty they have, is being manipulated and pushed into something they are not.
But it harms older women as well. An older woman is beautiful for what she is, and at the same time these very young models are pushed forward into a time of life they are unprepared for, older women are being pushed backward to a time of life that is passed for them, and which will not return.
Fashion is meant to enhance beauty, but here it seems that almost everyone, instead of enhancing and celebrating the beauty they have, is being manipulated and pushed into something they are not.
12
Whatever age they are, if they have bodies like skeletons, it clearly sends a bad message. What's old is new again- remember Twiggy?
5
Take a close look at the lead photo that accompanies the article. How many people are actually paying any attention to the models proceeding down the runway, or seem to be enjoying themselves? There are no smiles on the models nor amongst the audience. Most of the attendees are attending to their smartphone chores. Tweets, selfies and online media reign supreme. The models probably aren't smiling because management wouldn't let them take their smartphones onto the runway.
2
This is bad, all around. It fetishizes youth (it is inappropriate, by the way, for a child to be wearing clothes that cost thousands of dollars, if it is appropriate for anyone), it sets unrealistic standards of beauty--not to mention body image--for legions of teenage girls, and it encourages designers to dream up clothes for fourteen year olds, and then we are treated to the happy sight on the streets of New York of mutton dressed as lamb. It's interesting that there is not one word in this article about parents. Where are they? As the mother of daughters who were scouted by modeling agencies when they were in their teens--the answer is simply no.
12
Spohia Mechetner's mother is a single mom working two jobs to survive. To say no to Dior would have meant turning down a lot of financial security for her other children. And the parents are surrounded by other modelling agency representatives who promote the idea that modelling is glamorous and will save the family.
5
That was the excuse for Teri Shields, and quite a few other mothers who sold their daughters into show business. Most young models do not have the career that Brooke Shields did;most burn out after a few years and are washed up by 21-22.
6
"Fashion is in essence an industry based on deception: the promise that if you simply wear this you will look better/cooler/thinner/taller/more powerful than you really are. "
I love fashion but I think to most women it is an industry based on being able to make pleasurable the experience of living your life.
I love fashion but I think to most women it is an industry based on being able to make pleasurable the experience of living your life.
3
I really wonder at the values of the parents, especially the mothers, who must have a good sense of the superficiality of the world they are allowing if not pushing their daughters into. You would think that having been there, they would encourage their daughters in another direction, so it is a bit depressing to see Cindi Crawford's and Vanessa Paradis's daughters making this career choice.
14
Fashion is theatre, it's image making, no different than any other art. It’s not real. If you don’t understand that, then removing the images won’t change you. Yet writers love to get so utterly moralistic and outraged about fashion. Why not have a moralistic take on Olympic athletes, trotted out to compete on the world stage, plucked from their lives as normal children, their bodies featured, training with insane amounts of pressure? Dieting and performance enhancing drugs put their health at risk. They perform in packed stadiums for our entertainment as an example of a physical ideal, of the heroic. Olympic age rules are tweaked and inconsistent - Tom Daily was 14 when he competed in Olympic diving, most female gymnasts are children. The Olympics are equally superficial and set up the same impossible images. Being transfixed by youth on the brink of some sort of maturation is a rarefied moment, that’s its selling point. How such images are consumed is the issue, not that they should or shouldn't exist - given reasonable guidelines that respect the integrity and health of the subject as well as the intelligence of the audience. You may opt out if your morality is at stake. There was a time when a picture of two men kissing was the death nell for morality. Seeing Sofia Mechetner wearing couture on a runway is hardly a cause for moral outrage. It’s interesting that Larry Clark’s film, “Kids” is featured right now. That film is 20 years old!
5
While I believe in art and enduring its integrity I think it is reprehensible to have a topless 14 year old girl as part of it. Because it is labeled as art do we really feel this is acceptable. If so, then all pictures of pre teen children naked is "art". I would've hoped as a society we would have learned from the past. I guess we haven't.
11
There is tremendous outrage about children in the Olympics, which is why the minimum age to compete is now 16, at least in gymnastics. So Nadia Comaneci, who was 14 when she won gold in 1976, would not have qualified today. In addition, the bestselling book "Little Girls in Pretty Boxes", which exposes the abusive world of elite gymnastics and figure skating, remains in print 20 years after it was written. Lastly, former elite gymnasts such as Dominique Moceanu and Jennifer Sey have written memoirs about the abuse they suffered at the hand of their sport. So it is categorically untrue that elite sports featuring young girls gets no attention. Quite the opposite, in fact.
8
Sure, "Fashion is theatre, it's image making, no different than any other art. It’s not real." But the girls walking down the runway are real people. Often they're plucked out of poverty and have family members depending on them financially. Basically they're powerless, and to pretend that their powerlessness is not real means that you're ignoring the very real nasty things that can happen to these girls in the real world.
6
People who purchase the items modelled by these "girls", and readers of fashion magazines are just as much to blame. Designers are catering to their wants and desires.
5
The reason for the demand for underage models is that it is difficult to find many adult women that are 5'9" or taller and wear size 0. These young girls have boyish figures, which is demanded by the fashion elite in order to wear what they design.
9
no that is not the reason. are you paying attention?
2
The industry gets away with this because women spend a lot more on clothing than men. It designs a new style every year that becomes a must have to keep them spending those dollars.
Male models never achieve the status these female models earn because there's only so much you can do with a pair of trousers and a shirt. Most of us wear the same style of show year after year. I've been wearing the same WEJUNS style of loafer since junior High 50 years ago. Jeans or Chinos? Polo shirt? Oxford?
The clothes I see for men in the WSJ once in a while are so outlandish that no one would wear them much less spend the outrageous price shown. A flannel shirt for $1200? I can get one at Lands End for $70.A pair of combat boots for $900? I can get them at Cabelas for $200. And the androgynous models don't inspire men to buy the stuff.
Men are too practical and I guess boring.
Male models never achieve the status these female models earn because there's only so much you can do with a pair of trousers and a shirt. Most of us wear the same style of show year after year. I've been wearing the same WEJUNS style of loafer since junior High 50 years ago. Jeans or Chinos? Polo shirt? Oxford?
The clothes I see for men in the WSJ once in a while are so outlandish that no one would wear them much less spend the outrageous price shown. A flannel shirt for $1200? I can get one at Lands End for $70.A pair of combat boots for $900? I can get them at Cabelas for $200. And the androgynous models don't inspire men to buy the stuff.
Men are too practical and I guess boring.
5
.
.
This piece has interesting thinking and good writing -- as I expect from The New York Times.
The following paragraph is commendable (as are some others):
--------
And yet, no matter how many parental chaperones and stories are invoked, and no matter that these very young girls are the extreme rather than the rule, this doesn’t solve the public perception problem: that, as Ms. Ziff says, “when you dress children up in makeup and high heels, the implication is that they are sexual objects, and more often than not, that is how the images are read by the public.”
----------
Anyone who has ever seen a child, or who has ever seen clothes in a 21st-century clothing store, can relate to the words I've quoted from the piece.
So I am forced to ask: Why, at the top of the article, have New York Times editors included a photo of a 14-year-old GIRL "in a long, slightly transparent Victorian nightgownlike dress" and heavy makeup on an elevated stage in full view of a crowd of adults (including men)? The dress is indeed slightly transparent. And the lighting is so bright and focused that the girl's shadow is clearly visible, along with shadows of the heads of applauding adults in the front row. (I think they should be aghast, not approving.)
And why has The Times opted to display on the web page a photograph of a heavily made-up 13-year-old GIRL in a backless dress?
Unless your editors are marketing the clothes, the girls, or pubescent sexualization, such photos are grotesque.
.
This piece has interesting thinking and good writing -- as I expect from The New York Times.
The following paragraph is commendable (as are some others):
--------
And yet, no matter how many parental chaperones and stories are invoked, and no matter that these very young girls are the extreme rather than the rule, this doesn’t solve the public perception problem: that, as Ms. Ziff says, “when you dress children up in makeup and high heels, the implication is that they are sexual objects, and more often than not, that is how the images are read by the public.”
----------
Anyone who has ever seen a child, or who has ever seen clothes in a 21st-century clothing store, can relate to the words I've quoted from the piece.
So I am forced to ask: Why, at the top of the article, have New York Times editors included a photo of a 14-year-old GIRL "in a long, slightly transparent Victorian nightgownlike dress" and heavy makeup on an elevated stage in full view of a crowd of adults (including men)? The dress is indeed slightly transparent. And the lighting is so bright and focused that the girl's shadow is clearly visible, along with shadows of the heads of applauding adults in the front row. (I think they should be aghast, not approving.)
And why has The Times opted to display on the web page a photograph of a heavily made-up 13-year-old GIRL in a backless dress?
Unless your editors are marketing the clothes, the girls, or pubescent sexualization, such photos are grotesque.
11
I used to read fashion magazines religiously, starting with Seventeen, then Glamour, Bazaar and Vogue. The models were so beautiful, the clothing gorgeous, the exotic locales lush and exciting. Then I worked for a fashion photographer. And I stopped buying the magazines. And then I stopped working for the photographer. The photographer was a perv, somehow almost always getting a topless shot at the end of the shoot. The male clients in the schmatta business often found a reason to be in the changing area. One model who complained was never asked back for another casting. Don't get me wrong. There were wonderful people working too. Stylists and great, gentle hair and makeup people too. It is not an environment for a fourteen year old. Kate Moss, who was known for her nude photos, says it all in the last paragraph.
45
Mmmm, let me guess. Terry Richardson?
I admit I don't think too much should be made of this ,but I admit I was genuinely shocked when I went to the editor's note in the T Magazine beauty issue. Half the page is made up photos of models the Times deems of the moment.
Not only of them looks older than 17 -- on the outside. The editor praises the cover model, age 16, as full of grace and poise.
Not only of them looks older than 17 -- on the outside. The editor praises the cover model, age 16, as full of grace and poise.
6
This gave me flashbacks to a NYT article I read in the 90's, about a teenage model in that crazy world. Fast forward and she just had her second baby. It's Jaime King. (James is a Girl, 2/4/96).
3
Are you aware that she was a heroin addict for a while? Another peril of working in that industry - drugs.
3
Didn't that article point out her drug addiction at that time?
1
I don't think it's unreasonable to view this fascination with young girl models as a form of soft pedophilia. At least for the straight men in the industry, these girls are certainly sex objects. And for some of the women, too.
10
Thank you Vanessa for bringing this up AGAIN....
Cindy & Johnny ought to know better...
The way I see it: Lagerfeld is a lech and Raf Simons is on his way there too...........sad and sickening at the same time...
Cindy & Johnny ought to know better...
The way I see it: Lagerfeld is a lech and Raf Simons is on his way there too...........sad and sickening at the same time...
7
To me the worst thing about this is that the industry they are in is filled with sex predators. Underaged girls should not be around Hollywood, fashion, or any of these entertainment industries. I can only imagine what is going on. I would never allow my daughter to be anywhere near these people. It's bad enough that they get can get their hands on 18+ girls.
5
Jane Hitchcock was 14 when she was "discovered" and started modeling for the Wilhelmina Agency in the late '60's. So this is not really a new trend.
1
As far as I'm concerned the fashion industry has long been a bad joke. Costumes on the runways are just that - costumes, many of them ridiculous. The less silly styles are clearly not made for the bodies of real women who live, work, and play in the real world. The recent (years too long) fashion of putting the top of pants around the widest part of most women creating muffin tops and accentuating the non-flat belly on all but the anorexic along with form fitting tops (meant to meet the pants, but often not quite making it, especially if a woman is silly enough to move) clinging to bust and said muffin tops make the average (even the slim average) woman look awful. I wear what I wear - classic looks - as the so-called "fashions" come and go. I wonder why women let some 'designer' a world away tell them what looks good on their unique bodies (despite what the mirror tells them).
17
First of all, models need a union. They may be well-paid, when they make it, but most are abused by the industry.
Second, I see models all the time on the street, and the reason 13-year-olds are in demand is their coltish thinness. It is almost impossible to be a non-teen and be thin enough to be a model. (This is coming from someone who was naturally thin enough that my friends staged an intervention in high school because they suspected I may be anorexic. High metabolism exists, but top models are EXTREMELY thin for long periods of time.)
Second, I see models all the time on the street, and the reason 13-year-olds are in demand is their coltish thinness. It is almost impossible to be a non-teen and be thin enough to be a model. (This is coming from someone who was naturally thin enough that my friends staged an intervention in high school because they suspected I may be anorexic. High metabolism exists, but top models are EXTREMELY thin for long periods of time.)
5
I think you've overlooked the most relevant issue here, Vanessa. While manufacturers, advertisers, and media may warrant supervision and regulation, it's the public which drives the demand for pre-pubescent sexuality. Men are turned on by it, yes, and women, all of you, obsess over it. Luxury goods manufacturers display teen-age and pre-teen girls in their products as long as adult women covet their plumb lips, young skin, wide eyes and bony undeveloped bodies. You can't expect industry to adopt a different standard from a society which worships youth. Why not advise your adult readers to grow up and bypass the collagen injections and Botox? The Times and fashion press are all surfing the same wave. For every Iris Apfel there are a thousand Kaia Gerbers in your pages.
12
Anyone notice the way teenage girls and young women pose these days? Lips pursed, butt out, head back, mimicking what they see in fashion magazines, on billboards, everywhere. Look at any Facebook page where groups of girls post - and they are constantly posting pictures of themselves in these provocative poses I find absurd and embarrassing - but this is the way they see themselves. I grew up with Twiggy, and wanted to be skinny as a rail, but in a million years wouldn't have posed for photos in such an overtly sexualized manner. Boy, we've come a long way, baby. Depressing.
32
I've done it myself DLP--arm slung back over my hip (no squished fat pressed along my side; I've learned that much).
BUT--you make a very valuable point: young women are potty-trained on this modeling garbage. God, I am so glad that my daughter is a runner, never looks at these magazines and still has a milkshake every now and then!
Mothers; teach them to ignore this nonsense!
BUT--you make a very valuable point: young women are potty-trained on this modeling garbage. God, I am so glad that my daughter is a runner, never looks at these magazines and still has a milkshake every now and then!
Mothers; teach them to ignore this nonsense!
3
The young girls you see here and who are on the runway and traveling worldwide as minors have parents who allow for them to do so. They have tutors and or backstage schooling, believe it or not, and they do not have normal lives. They are paid of lot of money. There is a longer trajectory for underage models. No matter how young models are, they will undergo aging and if they are lead models, top models or whatever the current term is, they will have a longer life as a model if they start as young teenagers. It is the parents who must consent for them to participate and they are the ones who are responsible for pimping their children for money. How else can it be explained? Many people, men specifically are titillated by child like models. Many wealthy fans of couture fashion like young men who look like young women too, it's a question often of bizarre tastes, certainly bizarre by the standards most other people have. Morals and ethical treatment of young men and women? You decided but a minor must have parental consent so we can look to the parents who seize the opportunity to travel the world and amassed large amounts of money and celebrity, while they can, as mere children and going forward. Is it worth it? We might ask those who have had this experience and who have aged out, but will they tell all?
2
It is impossible to make beauty standards intellectually. Some people... some women... "girls" are so astoundingly beautiful, that whatever they put on looks wonderful. Some are really young, and some older. But it is impossible to make rules about who has it, and who doesn't.
1
Let the market speak. If women don't believe that they should be emulating teenagers, they shouldn't buy Dior. Those who find the complexion and figure of a teenager to be a platonic ideal -- never reached in full but always worth striving toward -- let them buy the designer's duds.
13
The consumer would never know this unless they were explicitly told the ages of the models used to market the apparel before each sale.
4
Let's face it--virginal looking girls are a turn-on for many men. It's simply sick.
23
And clearly, heterosexual men are the ones that follow Dior and read Vogue!
1
So these men buy the magazines and watch the shows that have these waifs parading on stage in ultra-expensive bizarre outfits? Sorry, I can't buy that as a reason that the fashion industry thinks what you call 'virginal' can sell.
Whats sick about it? Its perfectly normal and goes back thousands of years. Kings never picked far 40 year olds for a princess.
I think the only way this will change is if women decide not to patronize clothing designers that use essentially children to sell their wares. I have read Vogue since I was a child because of my interest in art. I am not in the industry. My little understanding of the fashion world is that runway fashion is mostly used to draw attention to the designer rather than than actually sell clothes to the masses -- the clothing is usually too expensive, bizarre, or not made to fit your average woman. So my sense is that most designers make money not from couture or high fashion but from less costly lines. Women should stop patronizing both the expensive and cheaper lines of brands they don't agree with.
On a separate note, I think any line that show real women and designs clothes that fits them will do well. Personally, I favor the petites line from places like Land's End, LL Bean, DKNY, or Talbots although quality has not been consistent recently. This also explains the phenomenal growth of companies like Torrentl Lane Bryant which cater to larger women.
On a separate note, I think any line that show real women and designs clothes that fits them will do well. Personally, I favor the petites line from places like Land's End, LL Bean, DKNY, or Talbots although quality has not been consistent recently. This also explains the phenomenal growth of companies like Torrentl Lane Bryant which cater to larger women.
14
As a man, I coudn't raise your counterpoint to "Diane". "What oft was thought but ne'er so well..."
"Nature's green is gold" will always be true. But that doesn't mean the more mature has no value. Just different.
To another point, I have always wondered, why do models all look miserable, bored, sullen, stoned, or blank? I know it's deliberate posing, not a true function of their outlooks (at least I hope not). They are directed to look that way. Way? Why? I just don't get it.
To another point, I have always wondered, why do models all look miserable, bored, sullen, stoned, or blank? I know it's deliberate posing, not a true function of their outlooks (at least I hope not). They are directed to look that way. Way? Why? I just don't get it.
7
Because they are intended to look superior. Inferiors and servants are forced to smile and be pleasing to their betters...it is a supplicating position. Those in charge need not smile or look pleasing or friendly to anyone but can look down with imperious boredom. This is why teenage girls will get told to "smile" by strangers, but no one would dare tell a grown man such a thing.
High fashion is intended first and foremost to imply high status, therefore smiling is a no go. The lower rent and lower status a brand gets, the more smiling you will see. Thus Walmart models smile, high-end models don't, and the truly low low end -- pornographic models -- pretend to smile and enjoy blatant degradation and insults. One's ability to pull off a sullen, unsmiling appearance and be socially allowed to do so is a pretty immediate and visceral indication of social status.
High fashion is intended first and foremost to imply high status, therefore smiling is a no go. The lower rent and lower status a brand gets, the more smiling you will see. Thus Walmart models smile, high-end models don't, and the truly low low end -- pornographic models -- pretend to smile and enjoy blatant degradation and insults. One's ability to pull off a sullen, unsmiling appearance and be socially allowed to do so is a pretty immediate and visceral indication of social status.
10
Why so dour?
1. They are hungry (always).
2. They are tired (fashion weeks are grueling).
3. Their feet are killing them (those shoes!).
4. They have just been though lengthy makeup and hair sessions, and have done clothing changes done in front of everyone behind the scenes. It can make a girl grumpy.
5. They are dying very hard not to trip and do a face plant.
.
1. They are hungry (always).
2. They are tired (fashion weeks are grueling).
3. Their feet are killing them (those shoes!).
4. They have just been though lengthy makeup and hair sessions, and have done clothing changes done in front of everyone behind the scenes. It can make a girl grumpy.
5. They are dying very hard not to trip and do a face plant.
.
3
sadly, these girls, girls, girls.....are sexualized and being used to promote the myth of a female as a sexual object as defined by males. they are children. the fashion "industry" should take responsibility for perpetuating a dangerous and demeaning lack of consciousness in our society.
11
And why has nobody mentioned eating disorders, which are rampant in the fashion industry? It's bad enough when an adult woman (or man, for that matter) suffers from an eating disorder, but for a young girl to be restricting calories, which of course you have to do to model high-fashion clothes, means possible loss of menses, and thereby estrogen, which will adversely affect still-growing bones and overall physical development and well-being. That in itself is child abuse.
55
When women respond by not spending their dollars with these outlets who support the false representation of children as women will we be taken seriously. Just say no. Buy elsewhere.
22
LOOKS can be deceiving. I have a 14-year-old sibling and teenage cousins. I cannot imagine them having this kind of high-profile exposure at that age. Just because someone looks old enough to walk down a runway or pose in a photo does not mean that they are. Let's please give children time to develop their own identities before they introduced into this kind of bizarre and high-profile world. (This is coming from someone who has worked in the fashion and modeling industries by the way. But not until I was at least 21.)
15
You do realize that many industries -- from music and movies to the royal family and even tech startup or corporate positions in new technology companies -- are heavily involved in adult worlds that, for their complexity and demands, probably dwarf putting on a frock and walking in a short semi-circle.
2
Technology, startups, the corporate world... those things are difficult in different ways. None of that can be equated to the emotional maturity that it takes to deal with the objectification and often bizarre antics of the modeling industry (and probably in some cases the movie and music industries as well). Predatory older men, countless invitations to parties, easy access to alcohol when you're underage, being spoken to with objectifying words like "doll" and "babe", being valued so heavily for your appearance and your appearance alone, being sexualized before you yourself have had time to understand your own sexuality... These experiences are part and parcel of the modeling industry. I don't think any teenager should be expected to navigate those experiences, most especially not at the young age of 13 or 14.
5
Cindy Crawford used to be angry that models were referred to as 'girls'. So what prompted her to allow her 13-year old daughter to join this industry? She needed the money? Or was she worried that if she waited until 18 nobody would hire her?
66
I am at an age where I have never had so much money or reasons to dress. I am still wearing Levis from when they were all cotton because I can't find jeans that don't bag out. Fashion on girl models leaves me laughing. I am attracted to almost anything Carmen Dell Orefice is wearing because she represents an age group 55-80 (mine) and she has a fabulous flare. Someone should cash in and design for the likes of us rather than 14 year olds who would never, in real life, wear this stuff.
32
Using underage models is trafficking, nothing more and nothing less. What's actually going on is exploitation and abuse of women - exploitation of the models and abuse of the rest of the gender who can't measure up to these absurd children's physical dimensions.
39
Parents have to sign the contracts.
So? Doesn't the exploitation begin with the parents?
Simple solution that is in the power of every woman everywhere. Don't buy the clothes. Don't buy the magazines. Don't buy the whole ethos the fashion industry is selling. Why would you if you had a grain of self respect??? If our money is good enough to buy these clothes then those same women should (and in fact are!) good enough to model them. If designers and the entire fashion industry think only our money is good enough for them then it's on every women with a grain of self respect to say No! As long as you hand over your money you're complicit in this crime, yes against these children, but also against all women and female children everywhere. Walk your talk Women. It's your runway if you take ownership of it! Otherwise be prepared for you and your children to be walked on. No excuses and no one to blame but ourselves.
17
While I agree that the modeling world is going to be too tough for younger girls, highlighting Sofia, the Israeli model, is telling a tale of triumph. Sofia comes from a life of poverty, where she takes care of her siblings, walking them from school, feeding them what they can afford, while her mom spends her days cleaning other people's houses to make ends meet. The Dior show was a lifesaver for Sofia and her family, she earned close to 1 million Shekel (about $262,000) - more money than that family has ever seen. I think that if she finishes school, has a parent or guardian with her at shows, and has positive influences around her, modeling can become a career for her and a saving grace for her family. Sometimes, its not all evil.
8
You just used the same argument used over and over again to justify having kids get into prize fighting - it's a way out of poverty. Yes maybe for a few. They are exceptions that so often prove the rule that pushing/rushing children into what should be adult-only pursuits is a bad idea.
10
I don't disagree that one should exploit one's advantages for financial gain. However, modelling is a career that is notoriously harsh on women, especially as they age. It's not a career that most women, beautiful as they are, can sustain for long so I would hope that her family does not exploit her (not an uncommon thing as we see from child models and stars) and helps her find a career that can last her decades.
Growing up, I had an acquaintance who was a model and landed on a few teen magazine covers; she was also super-smart. Her family advised her to do part-time modelling but continue her studies. She graduated with two degrees -- physics and dance.
Growing up, I had an acquaintance who was a model and landed on a few teen magazine covers; she was also super-smart. Her family advised her to do part-time modelling but continue her studies. She graduated with two degrees -- physics and dance.
2
Historically, there are many ways that poor families sell their underage daughters to survive financially--from forced marriages, to placement in brothels, to placement with that uncle no one is really sure about. Underage modeling is another way of commenitizing the sexual allure of underage daughters. Let's talk about fixing the real problem rather than complementing trafficking as a family support mechanism.
11
Gerber looks her age, 12-14 and immature; Depp, merely terrified and overwhelmed. In both cases neither looks mature enough to read the NYT.
19
You're expecting today's 12-14-year-olds to what? Read? Don't think so.
4
The writer conflates several issues. First, she bemoans fashion's overemphasis on youth, physical perfection, and unattainable beauty. That is a bit of a snore, really. I see nothing wrong in celebrating youthful beauty, whether it be in fashion, film, television or on stage. I am well past 50, and not above feeling a twinge of envy when I see a lovely young girl being young and lovely. But I say good for her. It's her moment. Second, Ms. Friedman condemns the (perceived) dishonesty of presenting a child styled as an adult. But isn't it equally dishonest for a male model to be photographed or walked as a female (Andrej Pejic)? Isn't all maquillage, plastic surgery and other artifice dishonest? Is the heavily repaired, 84-year-old model Carmen Dell'Orefice any more "honest" than the heavily styled 16-year old wearing Dior? Designers, stylists, and photographers are in the business of illusion. It's not intended as unvarnished reality.
Third and last -- and the only issues I consider to be of concern -- are fashion's sexualization of young girls and the oft-reported violations of child-protection employment laws by the industry. I do find the pervasive sexualization of children alarming and offensive (it goes beyond fashion and throughout popular culture, by the way). It must be said, however, that parents are often complicit. Google up images of 13-year-old Kaia Gerber and you will see photos of her dressed like a woman ten years older. Next to her is her ex-model mom.
Third and last -- and the only issues I consider to be of concern -- are fashion's sexualization of young girls and the oft-reported violations of child-protection employment laws by the industry. I do find the pervasive sexualization of children alarming and offensive (it goes beyond fashion and throughout popular culture, by the way). It must be said, however, that parents are often complicit. Google up images of 13-year-old Kaia Gerber and you will see photos of her dressed like a woman ten years older. Next to her is her ex-model mom.
26
In the article, it explains what can happen when young girls model for major companies such as Dior or Vogue. Today, several companies use underage women to model because it appeals to more customers. Having younger girls model will allow younger people to buy the company's clothing. It is very surprising that a few years ago women such as Celine Dion were wanted in magazines and now they show girls from ages of thirteen to eighteen. The question is, what makes younger woman more appealing than older women? As technology becomes more advanced people, especially girls feel more pressure from the outside world. For example, if a fourteen year old girl is asked to do something for a modeling job that she does not want to do, she might feel more pressured than an older model because they have more courage and a higher self esteem. In the article, it explains that Kate Moss was faced with a similar problem when she was a young model. Also, since these girls are younger they do not know the negative effects of what can happen when you start working too early in life. For example, if young girls start modeling too early they may not know how to handle their pay, which can hurt them in the future. As you can see working at too young of an age, whether it's modeling or any other full time job can hurt a girl's future. In the world that we live in today, young women should slow down and focus on being teenagers instead of growing up too fast.
3
We all have blood on our hands when we admire and buy these clothes. Fashion designers want women to look like little girls (or boys) because that is what consumers purchase.
7
I think it's power wielding magazine editors that demand a lot of the crazy fashion. It sells magazines. Runway rarely makes it to stores without a lot of design changes. Very few pieces are produced, they're lent to celebs, some very rich private clients might buy but regular folk want wearable designs that don't break the bank, aren't out of style in one season, and don't look ridiculous. It's ridiculous to speak to what young girls are wearing, 14 years olds do NOT wear Dior, they wear Forever 21.
2
Exactly. Consumers purchase little girls and boys. The clothing has nothing whatever to do with it. It's sex trafficking, pure and simple. And that people like Johnny Depp traffick their own daughters speaks volumes for their greed.
The gown this child is wearing is extremely sheer. I have seen this photo in another publication and was extremely upset that the model was not wearing a bra or undergarment. She was exposed and no one objected (the parents, guardian, stylist, designer or audience are all culpable). Why was this allowed as it appears to border on child pornography?
17
because that is what the fashion designer was paying her the big $ for? You would be surprised how many parents, designers, etc. would not object for this reason. Plus they could rationalize it by claiming that girls were more revealing outfits on the beach.
1
The fact that you would have considered this innocuous --- and in fact, judging by the high collar, rather prim --- outfit "pornography" says a great deal more about how you see the world than how the world sees this dress.
1
There was a close up shot of this model published in another publication and her breasts are totally visible. This particular shot used by NYT is at longer range and not quite as revealing. I hesitated to comment any further as I don't want to exploit this child any further than she has already been exploited. However, someone has got to take a stand on this.
5
Lolita, again.
17
This issue is made so much harder by the fact that so many girls WANT to be objectified and sexualized for a chance at fame.
When I was a child, I remember my classmates' ambitions were to grow up to be doctors, firefighters, astronauts, etc. These days, most of my kids' classmates just want to be famous. Seems like if you are not famous, you might as well not exist. I guess that's why intagram and facebook are so popular -- you too can be a star!
When I was a child, I remember my classmates' ambitions were to grow up to be doctors, firefighters, astronauts, etc. These days, most of my kids' classmates just want to be famous. Seems like if you are not famous, you might as well not exist. I guess that's why intagram and facebook are so popular -- you too can be a star!
24
but these models also make more, in a single day, than firefighter and most adult professions (doctors withstanding). Combine this with game and why would any teenage girl not be interested (or adult for that matter - remember most model wannabees in NY and LA are in their early 20s).
2
Yes by @Yoda - if the modelling industry favors very young women, what happens when these young models turn 30? Suddenly they are considered over the hill and nobody wants them? And then what? They went ahead and put aside their education and other career prospects for short term financial gain, but life is long - what are they to do for the rest of their days? It's like a lot of child actors who find themselves completely lost when they hit adulthood, and it's very sad.
1
I don't think girls realize what being objectified and sexualized even means until it's too late. You're assuming a maturity that isn't there yet. And girls that are brought up to be nice girls, please others and have not had anything really bad happen to them until then can be easily manipulated. It's just being naive. I think in a similar way people that rationalize sexualizing young girls try to justify this by saying it was what they wanted, that they had "ambitions." Again, someone needs to be the adult in the room with their child and say, you are not ready for this. I guess Cindy Crawford felt otherwise.
4
Yes, but then again why does the NYT have a columnist that goes on and on intellectualizing fashion?
I'm as interested as the next person in looking my best but has anyone read/looked at T the nyt fashion magazine?
Other than a few women, most of these designers are men. Many androgynous at that. So it is ridiculous all around.
Cindy Crawford's daughter is stunning. I do remember reading somewhere that her mum said she wd only model at 17. Wonder what happened to that. Sad.
I'm as interested as the next person in looking my best but has anyone read/looked at T the nyt fashion magazine?
Other than a few women, most of these designers are men. Many androgynous at that. So it is ridiculous all around.
Cindy Crawford's daughter is stunning. I do remember reading somewhere that her mum said she wd only model at 17. Wonder what happened to that. Sad.
4
As a 46-year-old mother of a 16-year-old daughter, I see every day how ridiculous it is to use a teenager to model clothes meant for adults. I am slim and wear a size 4. However, my body and my daughter's body are nowhere near the same. She can't even borrow my clothes because they don't fit her! She can't shop in many mainstream stores that cater to adults (i.e., the Gap, where size 00 doesn't even fit her). She has to shop in stores that cater to teenagers, like American Eagle Outfitters. Otherwise the clothing is so oversized on her that it won't stay up!
2
perhaps the reason teenage models are used is so they can advertise directly to teenagers. There is a huge market there.
1
I don't want to look like a 13 year old girl, I want to know how clothes look on an adult woman. She can be tall, she can be thin, but she should be a full-grown woman if she's going to try and get me to part with my money for a garment.
My daughter is tall and often told how beautiful she is...she's barely 12, and I get comments like "Watch out for the boys," or "You're in trouble with that one." So to the minority of commenters who think these child models are old enough to call the shots, please know girls can be labeled "sexy" long before they know what the word means. I just called my daughter over to the computer to show her the wildly inappropriate photo of Kaia Gerber, to let her know that that's not an acceptable or healthy way for a very young teen to look. She looked at me like "Mom's a little nuts," but it's a teachable moment for all of us, and especially young girls who come to believe that a 13 year old child in thigh high boots is normal.
And to Cindy Crawford...the last time your daughter modeled in a very short mini skirt a couple of years back, you heard the backlash and vowed not to let her model until she was older. Is 13 what you had in mind? Hear us again, Cindy, She. Is. Too. Young.
My daughter is tall and often told how beautiful she is...she's barely 12, and I get comments like "Watch out for the boys," or "You're in trouble with that one." So to the minority of commenters who think these child models are old enough to call the shots, please know girls can be labeled "sexy" long before they know what the word means. I just called my daughter over to the computer to show her the wildly inappropriate photo of Kaia Gerber, to let her know that that's not an acceptable or healthy way for a very young teen to look. She looked at me like "Mom's a little nuts," but it's a teachable moment for all of us, and especially young girls who come to believe that a 13 year old child in thigh high boots is normal.
And to Cindy Crawford...the last time your daughter modeled in a very short mini skirt a couple of years back, you heard the backlash and vowed not to let her model until she was older. Is 13 what you had in mind? Hear us again, Cindy, She. Is. Too. Young.
22
It would be best if the NY Times did a full exposé of the fashion industry like they did for the nail industry about the real lives of fashion models. There are untold stories of drugs and sex between photographers and their underage models (some have lost their virginity as young as 12 with the promise of, ironically, more exposure). This pact that the international Vogue signed is all smoke and mirrors. There is no one to enforce and no one to audit, how do we really know they're keeping true to their pact? You don't. You just have to take their word for it. As masters of fantasy and pretense, do you really think the fashion industry will eschew a fresh young face that will sell their clothes for morals? That ship has sailed a long time ago.
7
Ms. Tan is delusional. Teenagers aren't ambitious, they are brainwashed. They live in a world that caters to their every whim and whine. And they see all women sexualized to the point of embarrassment. So naturally, they assume that is how they get attention too.
These people live in a fantasy-land where they will say anything, do anything, use anyone to justify their need for attention and adulation.
This is nothing short of immoral, using young girls to push fashion. Fashion of all things.
I don't care what the people buying see. But what is being done to these girls, teaching them at such a young age they are nothing but sex objects to be used by anyone who cares to do so... this is revolting.
These people live in a fantasy-land where they will say anything, do anything, use anyone to justify their need for attention and adulation.
This is nothing short of immoral, using young girls to push fashion. Fashion of all things.
I don't care what the people buying see. But what is being done to these girls, teaching them at such a young age they are nothing but sex objects to be used by anyone who cares to do so... this is revolting.
131
"But what is being done to these girls, teaching them at such a young age they are nothing but sex objects to be used by anyone who cares to do so... this is revolting."
It's pretty sickening, with all the sexting, slut shaming, bullying, date rape that happens nowadays, I feel sorry for teens today. Tougher than when I was growing up.
It's pretty sickening, with all the sexting, slut shaming, bullying, date rape that happens nowadays, I feel sorry for teens today. Tougher than when I was growing up.
I am a Sara Ziff fan. I think she is doing great work in a profession that has sorely lacked leadership and advocacy for these young workers.
6
Isn’t using girls as sexual objects to sell women’s clothing a kind of misogyny?
11
since its exploitation for the purpose of selling womens clothing to women it is OK.
Hiring young girls and dressing them like sex objects is not 'kind of misogyny', it is misogyny.
Where are their parents?
Where are their parents?
This is alarming! Are there any celebrity kids left that DON'T want to be a model? This is a very unfortunate message that is sent to the average young women (and men) who don't have glam-parents. Also, not that Johnny Depp is Mr. Intellectual, but I would have expected that he'd have a better grip as a father to have projected to his daughter that there is a world filled with goals, hard work, and real challenges. Nothing good comes out of parading around in ugly clothes at the age of 14. End of story. The other disturbing fact is that we, in this case, any female creature over 20, are supposed to identify with scraggly, really completely uninteresting looking tweens like that Rose? It's insanity, and close to becoming a human rights issue. Boykott this child-abusive sexism, people, with all you've got.
12
"This is a very unfortunate message that is sent to the average young women (and men) who don't have glam-parents. Also, not that Johnny Depp is Mr. Intellectual, but I would have expected that he'd have a better grip as a father to have projected to his daughter that there is a world filled with goals, hard work, and real challenges. Nothing good comes out of parading around in ugly clothes at the age of 14"
are your comments intended as satire? Most of these 14 year old models make more in one day than most grown men and women make in an entire year! Plus they have not spent years learning their "trade". Why would they (and any teenage for that matter) not mock these grown women and men for their jobs considering this?
are your comments intended as satire? Most of these 14 year old models make more in one day than most grown men and women make in an entire year! Plus they have not spent years learning their "trade". Why would they (and any teenage for that matter) not mock these grown women and men for their jobs considering this?
I doubt that you calling one of the subjects of this article "scraggly and completely uninteresting looking" is a positive step forward in your desire to combating sexism and the misuse of girls in advertising.
1
I once heard models referred to as "freaks of nature" and the more I thought I about this I realized this is true. Think about it. These ladies are much taller than the average women, much thinner than the average women, and their body proportions are way off (i.e. arms that are unusually long, huge feet, etc.). How did this become the standard for beauty? That any girl would want to be recognized as being a "freak" is ridiculous.
3
They're not recognized as freaks - they have fame, fortune, and rich-famous-and-gorgeous boyfriends like Leonardo DiCaprio. So of course it's appealing.
3
because on tv and print these "features" look normal. If the models had "nromal" features they would look freakishly abnormal. Take my word for it, I used to work as a photographer.
3
What is society telling these young women about what is important in their lives - beauty, fame, being sexualized ? At a time of their maturing, we substitute this ephemeral goal for the natural adolescent dreams of what they may do in the world - we're cheating them.
Ashley Olsen and Mary Kate Olsen, who won the Council of Fashion Designer award two years straight for their fashion line, The Row, ought to be commended for using older models, including Lauren Hutton, who is still gorgeous at age 72. If the Olsens can manage to have one of the most successful fashion lines using older models, so can the others.
88
Fashion is a business. Those of us who are sick and tired of fashion presenting a barely pubescent body as the feminine ideal can do something about it. The leverage point is advertising, and the vulnerable targets are not the designers, but the hair product and makeup companies that advertise in fashion magazines. Start a campaign to protest Proctor and Gamble's support of the exploitation of young teenagers. P&G is sensitive about its wholesome image; they'd be the perfect choice. Boycott Pantene and Olay products until P&G stops advertising in any magazine that shows images of underage models.
That picture of 13-year-old Kaia Gerber is disgraceful. What were her parents thinking?
That picture of 13-year-old Kaia Gerber is disgraceful. What were her parents thinking?
79
Well...let's face it...Cindy Crawford, though still inarguably 'gorgeous' ..isn't really the face of fashion anymore, now is she? She, like so many before her, has been mowed over for the younger models so to speak. So by having her daughter in this spotlight, in a way, Cindy is now back in the spotlight. Same for the fading-into-middle-age Johnny Depp, who really doesn't seem relevant anymore, save for his appearance in that sorry attempt at the Willa Wonka remake...or whatever it was. Either way, these folks seem to be vicariously trying to revive their own fame, via their kids.
4
Are we talking about P&G or Dior here? Please be clear.
"They are ... in their early teens, a distorted physical time when girls have the bodies of children but the height of an adult."
This gets to the heart of the matter. Designers want an extreme frame that most women don't naturally have when they're older. Which begs the question: If you need adolescent models to sell your clothes, perhaps you should work on your designs more??
This gets to the heart of the matter. Designers want an extreme frame that most women don't naturally have when they're older. Which begs the question: If you need adolescent models to sell your clothes, perhaps you should work on your designs more??
130
these designs well, in general. Women line up to buy this rubbish. If only they were not so vanity oriented this would not be a problem. This is the real root of the problem.
The more significant issue for me is that we are dressing up girls to look like women to sell products to a mature audience. Sadly, women in their 40's, 50's and up, of which I am a member, will never have the body of a teenager. The gap, between what my body looks like and the aspirational "ideal" simply feeds the plastic surgery industry. It leaves most of us unable to have a healthy view of ourselves or of normal aging. Instead, it is something to be denied and stopped. Our unhealthy preoccupation with youth does everyone a disservice, from the models, to the women who purchase high end fashion, to our employment. These same attitudes extend into our work environment, making the contributions of older men and women less valued. I did not expect major fashion brands to continue using models closer to the age of their consumers, though it was nice while it lasted. I knew Joan Didion was simply a small diversion. However, I do expect that fashion brands know their consumers a little better. I may not need a 60+ model but there are some pretty sexy older women out there. And they really aren't that hard to find.
117
May I correct you? "Sadly, women in their 40s and 50s will never have the body of teenagers", you write. Not sadly, thank goodness!! All in all, that age group of women have the best figures ever and look gorgeous! And I'm definitely one of them! I wouldn't touch one of those designer-duds worn by empty-faced teens if you gave me Botox-coupons for a year...
19
Agree with Sabine, there is no "sadly". Is your body as it is at 50 because you have lived life? Climbed mountains? Eaten fabulous food? Survived illness and injury? Given birth, perhaps? All these things are not sad - they are blessings. Enjoy your body.
6
'...Sadly, women in their 40's, 50's and up, of which I am a member, will never have the body of a teenager...'
It is not 'sad' to many of us.
I had no figure as a teenager and actually looked my best in my late 30s.
Now if I could have *that* figure and face again, but alas...
It is not 'sad' to many of us.
I had no figure as a teenager and actually looked my best in my late 30s.
Now if I could have *that* figure and face again, but alas...
2
Is it not past time for us, the adult human viewers of such advertising, to grow up mentally, and stop seeing some kind of sexual innuendo in all that we view? I feel as though I am still living in the 1950s. We should have grown more, mentally, since then...........
3
Posing young girls half naked is far beyond 'sexual innuendo' to any rational human being.
1
Why would adult women who were at least smart enough to marry money, if not inherit it, so as to be able to buy these type of expensive cloths think they would look like a 16 year old when they wear them. If anything the comparison between the model and the mature buyer will accentuate the physical difference between the two, and the visual winner will be the teenager.
7
well said James. The sad part is that most women do not realize this. So the hoax continue. Really a sad commentary on the women who keep this industry in business.
Human brains aren't completely mature until somewhere in age 20-26. Underage models are exploited, pure and simple, to sell expensive clothes to self-delusional adults. Talk about yuck factor.
The fashion industry itself seems to be stuck in a teen behavior loop, trying to shock people into noticing the latest transgression. It's predictable and boring.
And it makes me cry to think of the girls being manipulated to do what the "adults" in the industry demand of them.
The fashion industry itself seems to be stuck in a teen behavior loop, trying to shock people into noticing the latest transgression. It's predictable and boring.
And it makes me cry to think of the girls being manipulated to do what the "adults" in the industry demand of them.
69
How sad to sexualize a child of 13 and paradoxically, then we are disgusted by pedophilia! Hypocrisy and the loss of a moral compass.
Childhood stolen from young women for greed, vanity and misguided Designers and CEOs.
And where are the parents of this children?
Will the beauty of these youngsters be less valuable to fashion when they turn 18 and are lovely young women?
Who perverted this notion?
Childhood stolen from young women for greed, vanity and misguided Designers and CEOs.
And where are the parents of this children?
Will the beauty of these youngsters be less valuable to fashion when they turn 18 and are lovely young women?
Who perverted this notion?
47
'...I'm on this new diet. Well, I don't eat anything and when I feel like I'm about to faint I eat a cube of cheese. I'm just one stomach flu away from my goal weight.' Emily Blunt's character Emily in Devil Wears Prada. Ramping up the pressure on women to be younger, thinner, tighter skinned and shinier, the fashion business takes no prisoners.
44
Go back a hundred plus years or so and you discover that girls were marrying at 14. They were usually marrying much older men. Because of the high birthing mortality of women, it was necessary that procreation started early for women. Now a 14 year old is a child even though she may be a woman that mother nature groomed for child birth. Some girls at 14 are more women than women 30 years old. So get off your high horse and leave these young women to their ambitions.
5
Wow. Sounds like someone wishes we could go back to the olden days? And I suppose it was also mother nature that groomed for these 14-year old girls to marry much older men? You know, sorta like how it's still done in parts of the Middle East, Pakistan, etc.?
26
Go back a hundred plus years and you'll find that men used women and girls much like they do today. Same thing goes for the beauty/fashion (and porn) industry. This has nothing to do with ambition so stop excusing the exploitation of girls and women.
13
"So get off your high horse and leave these young women to their ambitions. "
Figaro, you forgot to mention most of these models make more in one day than most adults make in a year! They trully are financial successful. ANd without many years in school or training. Is it any wonder teenagers worship this profession and aspire so much to it?
Figaro, you forgot to mention most of these models make more in one day than most adults make in a year! They trully are financial successful. ANd without many years in school or training. Is it any wonder teenagers worship this profession and aspire so much to it?
1
It seems to me that the use of older models, or sometimes 'quirky looking' models used for certain designers' shows or print ads, is just a temporary trend that can come and go. But the notion of younger = more attractive still reigns supreme.
But we as a whole allow and perpetuate this, by buying 'anti-wrinkle' creams, 'age-defying' lotions and potions, botoxing this and 'lifting' that. Yes, the anti-aging messages are never-ending and insidious, but anyone with a truly open mind can see there is beauty in a wide range of people, and from all age groups. Yet so many people cannot see this brainwashing for what it is: a simple but apparently effective ploy to sell products and services and 'procedures'.
But we as a whole allow and perpetuate this, by buying 'anti-wrinkle' creams, 'age-defying' lotions and potions, botoxing this and 'lifting' that. Yes, the anti-aging messages are never-ending and insidious, but anyone with a truly open mind can see there is beauty in a wide range of people, and from all age groups. Yet so many people cannot see this brainwashing for what it is: a simple but apparently effective ploy to sell products and services and 'procedures'.
9
If only the women clients keeping this industry in business, through their vanity, had the intelligence to see through the "hoax". Naturally, as we well know, they are really not responsible.
Perhaps it's time the rest of us finally 'got' fashion. The whole idea was cooked up in the courts of medieval European kingdoms, especially (of course) France, as a way of controlling all who dared show, the better to preserve royal power by intimidating potential rivals. In those days, if you didn't conform to the kings' whims, you could lose your head over it. Literally.
While we've not many royal courts with absolute power these days, at least in the West, we're still being subjected to the whims of uncrowned 'monarchs' of a control-happy business world, so why should the continued enforcement of the waif look for females and muscle definition for males - both requiring such strict attention to diet and working out that there's little time for anything else (such as thinking, exploring, reading, or just harmlessly doing your own thing in general) - be any surprise? The point here has ALWAYS been control. We'd need to be totally naive to think otherwise.
A relatively recent example? Remember Coco "Je suis elegance" Chanel ("I am elegance" - an actual quote)? And recall HER political sympathies?
As the legal folks like to say, tossing in a bit of Latin, "Res ipsa loquitur" - the thing speaks for itself.
While we've not many royal courts with absolute power these days, at least in the West, we're still being subjected to the whims of uncrowned 'monarchs' of a control-happy business world, so why should the continued enforcement of the waif look for females and muscle definition for males - both requiring such strict attention to diet and working out that there's little time for anything else (such as thinking, exploring, reading, or just harmlessly doing your own thing in general) - be any surprise? The point here has ALWAYS been control. We'd need to be totally naive to think otherwise.
A relatively recent example? Remember Coco "Je suis elegance" Chanel ("I am elegance" - an actual quote)? And recall HER political sympathies?
As the legal folks like to say, tossing in a bit of Latin, "Res ipsa loquitur" - the thing speaks for itself.
10
A child's body with adult height was me by age 12. I felt awkward and freakish at times. Never beautiful.
5
What I have never understood is - why? Why use young girls to sell clothes to adult women? In the '30s and '40s and even into the '50s, the models were 18 and up and there were many women designers designing for women. Over the last 60+ years, however, it's become primarily men designing for young girls. Why the shift? And why have women allowed it? I am 50, and a size 4-6 (so I'm certainly not an obese feminist. Just a middle-aged one). I have the money to afford fashion and the relationship to dress to get lucky, but I am at the point where I largely don't buy designers anymore precisely because I am not 14, 16 or 18. The clothes don't fit right, or the styling is too young (or, worse, too old) or I simply can't pull off the look the same as a teenager. Nor do I want to. But still I look at the runways online or leaf through magazines and l feel utterly inadequate.
I am going to miss Donna Karan.
I am going to miss Donna Karan.
18
Amee, I actually worked many years in fashion advertising and I can give you the reasons for their choices. First, the images are suppose to be aspirational. I am similar in age to you and to be honest, do not find these models aspirational in the least. But that is the thought. Models are young and thin because the clothing looks better on them. It drapes and hangs well. It also requires less post production (retouching). Young girls do not require as much facial retouching, have as many issues with blotchy skin or smoothing of the dress material as a model with a mature figure. Much more work is generally required for an older model. And by the way, Akris Punto is a great brand for a "woman of that certain age". I am also thin and it hangs well. Narcisco Rodrigues is also a good choice. Both are European brands and are thus cut more true to size. You will not feel inadequate wearing either brand but it will set you back financially.
4
Nothing more than the threat of power from women keeps them infantilized. And women participate in this.
3
Why doesn't someone just do an expose on what happened to all those teen models from the 80's and 90"s? Many of them (if they survived) are old enough now to tell their own story and recount their experiences. I seem to recall Kate Moss having a serious drug problem for several years, perhaps the fallout from her teen modeling days. If the fashion industry really wants to curb this behavior, somebody needs to shine a spotlight on it and not in a good way.
12
considering the financial rewards and the fame even this would not deter most teenagers (or their parents, more sadly) from this profession.
These children have something called parents, or perhaps, in some cases, guardians. Their job is to say NO!
If they do not, you can blame the fashion industry, but they exist to make money (like everything else in this society) and can only be blamed for part of the problem. The other part is that women see these clothes and then run out and spend a bijillion dollars on them to show whatever it is they think it shows.
I have known beautiful young girls who have been approached by modeling agencies only to have their parents refuse their offers. The girls may not like it, but that is what parents are supposed to do.
Yes, it is disgusting to use a 13 year old to promote sex appeal for the sake of profit, but look at what else we do in the USA........it's a long list of things that should be different than they are.
If they do not, you can blame the fashion industry, but they exist to make money (like everything else in this society) and can only be blamed for part of the problem. The other part is that women see these clothes and then run out and spend a bijillion dollars on them to show whatever it is they think it shows.
I have known beautiful young girls who have been approached by modeling agencies only to have their parents refuse their offers. The girls may not like it, but that is what parents are supposed to do.
Yes, it is disgusting to use a 13 year old to promote sex appeal for the sake of profit, but look at what else we do in the USA........it's a long list of things that should be different than they are.
11
Agreed. Johnny Depp and his wife and Cindy Crawford and her daughter's father (don't know who he is or if they are married - goes to show how much I follow this stuff) are the parents, and they should be saying "no". If they don't, there's not much the rest of us can do or say. Instead their daughters are doing something they may regret, especially if it includes the type of routine humiliations other models (see Kate Moss) have spoken of.
The photo of Miss Depp, to me, LOOKS like a 13 year old playing dress up in clothes that are too old for her.
The photo of Miss Depp, to me, LOOKS like a 13 year old playing dress up in clothes that are too old for her.
7
rebecca,
why would they? If their daughters pursued "normal" career paths and went to school they most they could hope for, in general, is a job that required one year of work to make what these models make in a single day!!!
why would they? If their daughters pursued "normal" career paths and went to school they most they could hope for, in general, is a job that required one year of work to make what these models make in a single day!!!
1
I think the fashion industry needs to do some soul-searching when it comes to the use of underage models. There needs to be a way to protect these young girls/boys from many people in the industry who use their positions to abuse/exploit them.
In many cases the parents of the underage models are to blame since they seek financial gain and the possibility that their child will become the next big thing. Maybe the city should prohibit the use of underage models for campaigns and such?
In many cases the parents of the underage models are to blame since they seek financial gain and the possibility that their child will become the next big thing. Maybe the city should prohibit the use of underage models for campaigns and such?
6
I want realistic depictions of the clothing - how it will appear on women who are old enough to have jobs and buy the clothing for starters, but also - women of varying colors, weights, and ages. That's truth in advertising. Also, this type of advertising perpetuates the notion that is prevalent in this country that females beyond a certain age are no longer attractive. If the fashion industry is not willing to represent varying ages, weights, and races in its advertising, then the media need to put guardrails on the types of ads they will accept (e.g., newspapers, magazines, TV). Some companies do this when looking at law firms they'd like to work with - i.e., they check to see if the law firms make efforts in diversity. This needs to happen with the media.
24
Yeah, let them work for below minimum wages at fast food counters like the rest of the underage women.
10
There's the problem with objecting to Sophia; she's bringing her family out of poverty. Doesn't reduce the creep factor, but it does complicate her story.
5
janeh, you really need to see how much abuse teenages (including girls) take at minimum wage jobs! Then you may change your mind!
This subject makes me think of a related, more pernicious one: the sexualization of Halloween costumes for young girls. I first noticed this a decade ago, when I received a large, full-color ad from my local party store. In it were a couple hundred masks and full costumes for Halloween. I was shocked -- something that is very, very hard to do -- at the blatant appeal to sex in much (not all) the material directed at young girls. I'm not talking just young teenagers and immediate pre-teens here but even single digit kids.
I went into the store and read them the riot act. The folks were quite sympathetic to what I said but, as just the local branch of a national chain which issued the ads, there was nothing they felt they could do, certainly not without seriously risking their jobs.
I went into the store and read them the riot act. The folks were quite sympathetic to what I said but, as just the local branch of a national chain which issued the ads, there was nothing they felt they could do, certainly not without seriously risking their jobs.
59
I absolutely agree. At age 12 ( the age of my daughter) girls age into slutty costumes. Once you grow out of little girl sizes, there are only low cut, super short options. Ariana Grande was a Nickelodeon star less than a year ago, now she is doing the whole sex pot thing to sell music to my kids. Miley Cyrus sold us on Hannah Montana, now I have to stop my daughter from watching her videos on Youtube. It's bad enough what happens to these teen models, but my kids don't need to be "sold" the idea that unnaturally thin, skimpy clothes and a fine boned face is the beauty ideal.
10
This is part of a wider problem with regards to Halloween costumes for all women, regardless of age. Go to any shop at that time of year, and 99% of all the costumes for grown women will be coquettish or blatantly sexual in theme.
But...folkks can complain all they want that these costumes are 'inappropriate', but if they then turn around and buy them yet, because that's 'all that was available', then they are not doing anything to solve the problem. No one HAS to buy these costumes. There are ways to work around it. Make your own costume. I do it all the time, and have zero sewing skills. You just have to be a bit creative. Or if you buy an outfit at one of these shops but it has very little coverage, then wear a long sleeve top underneath, or leggings, etc. This topic has been discussed a thousand times...many women use Halloween as an 'excuse' to then dress vampy. There are ALWAYS alternatives. To say 'that's all the stores had' were revealing outfits, is a copout.
Girls always like to imitate those who are a bit older than themselves, so when they see the older girls dressing this way, they want to do the same. Parents who comply with their daughters wishes in this vein are also culpable.
But...folkks can complain all they want that these costumes are 'inappropriate', but if they then turn around and buy them yet, because that's 'all that was available', then they are not doing anything to solve the problem. No one HAS to buy these costumes. There are ways to work around it. Make your own costume. I do it all the time, and have zero sewing skills. You just have to be a bit creative. Or if you buy an outfit at one of these shops but it has very little coverage, then wear a long sleeve top underneath, or leggings, etc. This topic has been discussed a thousand times...many women use Halloween as an 'excuse' to then dress vampy. There are ALWAYS alternatives. To say 'that's all the stores had' were revealing outfits, is a copout.
Girls always like to imitate those who are a bit older than themselves, so when they see the older girls dressing this way, they want to do the same. Parents who comply with their daughters wishes in this vein are also culpable.
4
steve, it is this behavior that will enable these girls, when they grow up to compete in the real world (either for higher income earning men or more pay). Get over it.
I find the use of children on the runway and in print obscene. They are far too young to be thrown into this world that they're not ready for. As an adult, I also find it hard to relate to an image that's clearly juvenile no matter how much styling is involved. If I can't see myself in that dress--because I don't want to look like a teenager--they won't get my money; and isn't it a business after all?
93
How is this any different than a stylized form of child pornography? If we don't allow men to ogle pictures and videos of prepubescent girls, why do we think it acceptable to have fashion exhibit their bodies in "see through" clothing? It is still sexualizing young women. We should embrace youth, but not at the expense of losing childhood.
123
This is a hugely important point. Why is child pornography forbidden but the fashion industry gets a pass when a 13 year old wears a semi-transparent dress potentially seen by millions, including many who might be predators.
20
Jeannie,
yes these girls should be working at minimum wage jobs instead going into professions where they can take a year or more to make what these models make in a single day. Good advice.
yes these girls should be working at minimum wage jobs instead going into professions where they can take a year or more to make what these models make in a single day. Good advice.
1
Yoda - You seem to think that if there's enough money involved it's OK.
These are children, they should be going to school and enjoying their childhoods. There's plenty of time for them to grow up and earn a living.
These are children, they should be going to school and enjoying their childhoods. There's plenty of time for them to grow up and earn a living.
7
Let's face it, the fashion industry is much like the porn industry. They both feed on young women for financial gain.
130
Well said.
2
If you have ever had adult men ogle and leer at your pre-teen or young teenage daughter, you would understand how wrong it is to dress up girls (and yes, they are girls, not women) in women's clothing and parade them down a runway or put them on display in a magazine. It sends the wrong message that girls are sexual beings at ANY age. They aren't. It's bad enough that you can't even buy normal clothes for your daughter that aren't revealing and/or inappropriate.
211
And the girls don't understand that the signal they are sending to males is different from what they are communicating to other females in terms of style, because they are getting an OK from society and a pressure from marketing and they're foolish enough at that age to still trust others.
3
Luara, that is nice but you need to remember that these girls are making more, per day, than most adults make in a year. Plus they are looked upon very highly by society. Is it any wonder teenage girls so apsire to this profession?
2
The runway models always look so sad, angry, or blank. Maybe it's because they're missing their teenage years. Which also begs the question; why do the designers want to convey the idea that you will be miserable if you wear their clothes?
78
You've put your finger on the American Freudian dream: An angry rebellious child mentally with a nubile body, who can be sexually dominated. Like all that "Oo, Daddy!" porn. Yeah, it grosses me out too. But I have daughters.
7
No, you miinterpret the look. The look says, 'I am so BORED with my wealth.'
3