• Watch Live & Comment... The 2025 Met Gala!

  • MODERATOR'S NOTE: Please can all of theFashionSpot's forum members remind themselves of the Forum Rules. Thank you.

Model Hailey Clauson at the Center of Controversy Once Again

Unknownpleasures

Active Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
2,239
Reaction score
3
16-year-old Hailey Clauson is once again at the center of controversy in the modeling world.


Her new editorial in the fashion magazine Pop features the underage model in photographs with a nude p*rn star named “Destiny,” another nude woman with no name, and in a photo with an unidentified man’s hand strangling her neck.

Clauson is no stranger to pushing the limit. In 2011, her parents filed a lawsuit against photogarpher Jason Lee Parry when photos he took of Clauson at the age of 15 turned up on t-shirts at Urban Outfitters although they were told the photos were only for a small European magazine.



Although the main issue was that Parry did not have the rights to license the photos for commercial use, Clauson’s parents used the suit to draw attention to the fact that Parry sexualized their daughter stating,


“She is posed in a blatantly salacious manner with her legs spread, without a bra, revealing portions of her breasts.


The image of a teen in a spread-eagle position making her crotch area the focal point of the image may portray a child in a sexually suggestive manner and may be in violation of one or more federal and/or state laws.”


Clauson also became the poster child for the issue of young girls walking the runway for some of the fashion world’s biggest designers.


Clauson walked the runway for Calvin Klein, Versace, Miu Miu, Lanvin, Hermes, and Gucci before she even turned 16, which angered many people in the Council of Fashion Designers of America because of the long hours and limited breaks models receive when working a fashion show.

The current editorial in question was shot by photographer Max Permain. In the shots, which you can see by visiting Permain’s blog,


Clauson poses with nude p*rn stars, makes out with her own reflection in the mirror, and holds a baby. The most despicable image features Clauson being strangled by a mysterious hand. For a woman to be seen in this way is sickening; promoting violence against women is completely inappropriate, especially since so many young women read this publication.


The theme of the shoot is nothing but disturbing and disgusting. A 16-year old child should not be posing like this, let alone a woman of age.

I find it strange that after her parents made such a big deal about the Urban Outfitters’ incident, they would allow her to participate in a shoot this disturbingly graphic. Clauson’s agency, Next Models, has some explaining to do.

Source: bangstyle.com via ontd

Here's the editorial for those who have not seen it yet
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If this issue isn't a case for stricter laws (and making sure they are enacted) concerning underage model's I don't know what is. I do find it weird that her agency and her parents let her do this editorial for Pop. It has a lot of things that are not okay for a 16 year old girl to be exposed to.... p*rn stars, nudity, etc. I took a look at the editorial and to be honest it really freaks me out. And it would freak me out even if the model was older then 16. What worries me is how her parents are going to react to this one... are they going to get mad and claim that they didn't know? Because then I have to ask, how do you not know what your underage child is up to, especially since she's a model. Aren't models of a young age suppose to have guardians on set to make sure thing's like this Pop editorial don't happen??? All around this is a disturbing editorial and a worrisome problem of the use of underage models.
 
I agree with Yoninah; this editorial wold be disturbing and unsettling even if she was old enough. As is, it's insanely creepy. A p*rn star? Geez. A question that I have is why doesn't the photographer simply get a model who is old enough to do this shoot? Photographers should be ethical enough to not subject young teenagers to crap like this, but then again, controversy may have been exactly what they were aiming for. Another thing worth noting is that Hailey obviously has no qualms about doing things like this. Yes, she may be underage, but let's not act like she's an oblivious toddler. She's old enough to understand what is going on. I'm not saying that any of this is okay; but I think we should credit Hailey with a little awareness and intelligence.
 
:ermm: ...I begin to think the girl is in the wrong business...*shakes head*...:doh:
 
When i bought this issue yesterday and i saw that editorial i was shoked. why dont you wait until shes 18 to make her a bombshell...
 
I think her parents and her agency are trying to build her up through controversy.
 
I think her parents and her agency are trying to build her up through controversy.

Bingo. I think you hit the nail on the head. I find this girl incredibly vulgar by default, though I probably wouldn't be able to give a concise reason why. Hailey and her family are not that far from being in the white trash realm...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
although the whole ed has a weird mood, i don't think there is something bad about the pictures with the nude women because they're not doing anything sexual or erotic, what's wrong with her seeing other female bodies? and what is wrong with her being next to a p*rn actress? the woman is not doing something p*rn*gr*ph*c at all, she's posing topless like any regular model and i don't see Hailey doing sexual poses neither..

what i think it's disturbing though it's the shot of her being seemingly strangled, that picture is completely unacceptable :angry:
i don't see something explicitly inappropriate in the rest of the ed even though it worries me what other pictures they could've shot that weren't published or what other things she was asked to do in the photoshoot :unsure:
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Could Hailey be working on "creating the reason" for her parent`s next million-dollar law-suit"???

I wonder how ANY photographer / director can ask her to participate in such settings while the Urban Outfitters law-suit is still running! If I was a photographer / designer I wouldn`t work with her these days.

As for the "building her up through controversy" - versatility is the most important thing for a model and I highly doubt that people would buy luxury-cosmetics, cars or even toothpaste "from the underage p*rn-star on the motorcycle"...

Only those who already made it to the top can "afford controversy".

Btw: Controversy is the wrong term here. "Exploitation of minors", "exploitation of the female body" or "reducing women to sex-objects" seems more suitable to me.
 
^^^^I agree.
Wondering what is next?. Dating Olivier Zahm, Terry Richardson or Roman Polanski??!! :lol: Playboy? What?
Posted via Mobile Device
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not for anything, but I really don't have much sympathy for the model or her parents because a) I find it almost impossible to believe that the parents were left completely in the dark about this shoot and b) I find it even more impossible to believe that the parents didn't allow her to go into modelling in the first place. Either her parents are full of it, or they're the most naive people I've ever heard of to not know anything at all about the modelling industry before consenting for their teenage daughter to sign a contract with an agency.

And not for anything, the editorial as a whole just does not strike me as being remotely shocking. She's holding hands with or standing next to a nude woman? So what? She changes next to nude models backstage at fashion shows all the time, no? She's lustily making out with her own reflection? Is her face any more lust-filled than when she starred in a Gucci campaign with her head tilted back and her eyes closed in a look that was equally as sexual?

Sorry, but if the photographers/agency is to blame, then the parents are equally culpable as far as I'm concerned. You don't want your kid exposed to nudity or implications of sexuality, then don't consent to let them work in a world where those two things are commonplace.
 
It speaks volumes as to what Hailey's parents true priorities are when the only time they complain about the type of pictures their daughter is often pictured in is when money is involved. I do feel bad for Hailey though. It seems that she is surrounded by people who care more about making money off her than her well-being.

Heroin_chic, you're right that "controversy" is the wrong term being used here. ''Exploitation" is definitely the correct one.
 
I wonder how ANY photographer / director can ask her to participate in such settings while the Urban Outfitters law-suit is still running! If I was a photographer / designer I wouldn`t work with her these days.

I read that the lawsuit was thrown out of court

Earlier this month, however, a Manhattan federal judge dismissed the suit against photographer Jason Lee Parry, after ruling that he was 'not subject to jurisdiction under New York law.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...nsive-shoot-appears-choked.html#ixzz1oGd5xKQT
 
I don't see anything particularly wrong with the concept of the editorial itself. What's wrong with a full-on exposure of a female body? What's wrong with her posing with a p*rn star? p*rn stars are people, too. Sex is a perfectly natural contact between humans - there are just some people who do that in front of a camera. What's the big deal?

I do take issue with two of the pictures - the one with the strangling hand, which is very sexualizing of her persona, and especially the one where she's puting her arms on the blue paint. That shot I can take issue with, because you'll see that her breasts are almost fully exposed. Look at the cleavage on that - you can actually see her nipples if you look close enough. Why these people didn't go all over this shot but are crticizing the ones with the p*rn stars, I won't ever know.

Either way, I feel really bad for Hailey right now. The girl's being exposed at such a young age by photographers and her parentings are making her a cash cow, trying to squeeze as much money as possible out of her contracts and lawsuits, on something they agreed with beforehand. Don't you think you should know better than that before letting your daughter model? You can't say you were surprised, when you let her do it.

Poor, poor Hailey.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
this smells very much like Hailey having no control here really - her agency and parents loving the controversy/publicity. yikes.
 
^ I agree with you.

I'm glad there are other people who can look at these pictures and notice the disturbing elements. The picture of being chocked especially has no place in a supposedly 'fashion' photoshoot trying to sell clothes - no matter what the age of the model! And no offense for the 'p*rn stars are people too' argument - nobody is denying that, but I'd like to understand what a p*rn-star holding the hand of a 16 year old girl has to do with selling clothes. The image of a naked p*rn star belongs in a p*rn movie or adult magazine as far as I'm concerned.

What I see when I look at that, is a shoot that looks disturbing and creepy with the model looking dead in the eyes in half of the pictures, and it doesn't entice me ONE BIT to buy the 'clothes' they are selling,... if indeed it were even clothes they were advertising at this point.
 
why holding a baby or a naked woman's hand is so disturbing, actually..? i don't think it really shocked Hailey for more than a second. it looks weird, though.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Statistics

Threads
213,920
Messages
15,242,842
Members
87,869
Latest member
wedemboys69420
Back
Top