D
Deleted member 7575
Guest
I don't get this. Do you really think *nobody* thought Bratz dolls were inappropriate for children? (Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C). I don't understand the obsessive whataboutism surrounding the criticism Balenciaga did it, "ooooh but Mattel sells dolls in provocative clothes, too!!!" Yeah, and that's another issue entirely.
I think the ads are totally distasteful and no this isn't the first product that's been advertised provocatively with children, but I'm so amused by the fact that this ~*~transgressive~*~ designer is nowhere to be found amid the controversy. If he was truly trying to make a point, why not stand behind the "artistry" behind this ad campaign? That's the embarrassing part.
It's not that hard to understand. Society accepts a lot worse and permits a lot worse when it comes to abuse and sexualizing of children. If the goal is to actually protect children then this outrage is misplaced.
Regarding those dolls, Mattel has never had to issue an apology for those dolls, those dolls are still for sale. A few pissy online reviews is not quite the same as the public lynching and threats to personal safety that various individuals involved in the campaigns are now experiencing because people can't think for themselves.
The ads are in bad taste but they are harmless.
If you truly believe they are a threat to children I would suggest you think a bit harder on how that actually plays out.
However, don't mistake me saying any of this as a defense of Balenciaga. I have no more tolerance for thoughtless outrage than I do for thoughtless shock tactics.
But I agree with you that instead of passing off blame they should have explained themselves.The obviously didn't think that these images were as bad as many of you do. They could simply have explained this and let the chips fall were they may.
They have no moral backbone either way you look at it and I think this is the beginning of their undoing.