Monika "Jac" Jagaciak

[pocodolce]

Catwalk closed to the kittens

Catwalk closed to the kittens
Andrew Hornery
April 12, 2008

IS HYPOCRISY the new black?

Sydney's modelling world is in a lather over a planeload of teenage Eastern European models being shipped out for Australian Fashion Week at a time when local models such as Catherine McNeil (the darling of Christian Dior) and Abbey Lee Kershaw (the face of Gucci) are taking the international fashion world by storm.

Until yesterday, one of those imports was a Polish teenager, Monika Jagaciak, known simply as Jac. Critics said that at just 14 she was too young and she was banned from the event.

A fashion week spokesman said yesterday there had been confusion over Jac's age after it had initially spruiked her appearance, complete with saucy photos. A new policy now outlaws models under 16.

The local model Gemma Ward debuted at the fashion week at 15 while her mother confirms Tallulah Morton was only 13. Both modelled adult clothes.

Last weekend The Sunday Telegraph gushed over shots of Jac - provided by fashion week organisers - scantily clad in a wet white swimsuit lying on the floor of a jacuzzi. Her age was not mentioned, though it later emerged the provocative photo was taken when Jac was 13. The gush predictably turned to outrage in yesterday's Tele. The fashion week's knee-jerk reaction: ban Jac.

On Wednesday, the editor of Vogue Australia, Kirstie Clements, dropped Jac from contention for the magazine's cover. Last year, Clements copped the wrath of the Family Council of Victoria after featuring 15-year-old Katie Braatvedt on the cover up a tree in a ballgown. Braatvedt was "Vogue's favourite new face" in August 2006, at age 14.

In 1980, US Vogue put 14-year-old Brooke Shields on the cover. She then appeared in a Calvin Klein ad telling viewers: "You want to know what comes between me and my Calvins? Nothing."

Sydney is now in line with London, which bans models aged under 16, but why did it take 12 years?

[smh.com.au]

 

[pocodolce]

Pokies are a bad bet

Pokies are a bad bet
April 11, 2008 12:00am

VIEWED from a certain perspective, life is a series of bets. For example, we wager that years spent at school or university will pay off with a good job.

We gamble that the expense of travel will be rewarded with rich life experiences. And so on, right down to the most minor decisions, whether undertaken with an awareness of the odds in play or not.

We bet - subconsciously - that the odds of making it across the road to buy a hamburger are better than the odds of being run over while crossing that road. The trick is to make sure the odds are always tilted in your favour.
When it comes to poker machines, they are not.

This can be measured. In Fairfield, citizens dumped $330 million into poker machines during 2006 - out of a total disposable income for the area of $420 million.

Ponder those numbers for a few seconds more. Consider the wealth that just one suburb has gambled with - and lost.

It must be heartbreaking for residents, but it is breaking pokie revenue records. You can see which way the odds are stacked here.

Now, we are not against clubs or gambling or even pokies, in the abstract, but the issue with Fairfield and the rest of western Sydney is the massive concentration there of poker machines.

This is reflected in the gigantic sums being driven through these devices. On average, every Bankstown resident spends nearly $1500 a year on pokies. In Canterbury, it's up to $1782.

Let's revisit our "life is a series of bets" theory.
Western Sydney is a region under genuine mortgage pressure. Residents may therefore be more inclined than otherwise to chase the long odds of a big, mortgage-clearing pokie win.

It may not make economic sense, but worried people do worrying things.

A gigantic abundance of poker machines is exactly what people under pressure do not need.

Fashion failure

THE debate about younger models is getting older - when it fact it should be over.

There are no acceptable arguments in favour of International Fashion Week's decision to bring Monika Jagaciak, just 14 years old, to headline this year's catwalk frolics.

None. Jagaciak is a child. Australian Fashion Week is an event that will cast her in a sexualised adult context.
This is so wrong that you almost expect 60 Minutes' Peter Overton, the gentle interviewer of incestuous South Australians, to be modelling beside her.

Moreover, even Jagaciak's management in Poland realises it is wrong. After inquiries from The Daily Telegraph's fashion blog Fully Chic, Jagaciak's management quickly removed her birthdate from their website.

It was a clear acknowledgment that their client's ridiculously young age was a major issue. If it had not been, that birthdate - January 15, 1994, for the record - would still be presented online.

Instead, it is now concealed, like the shameful secret that it is.

There may be some among Fashion Week organisers who will rejoice at the publicity won through this scandal. They are mistaken.

All publicity is not good publicity.

Just ask Max Mosley, the Formula One boss now fighting for his career and reputation after being caught recently in a bizarre mock-Nazi sexfest.

At least Mosley indulged his weirdness in private. The unnatural spectacle of a 14-year-old girl parading at an event entirely synonymous with adult women was to take place in a blaze of spotlights.

And another thing . . ."BRING it on." So says Queensland Cowboys concussion machine Carl Webb to Raging Rooster Willie Mason. In the interests of sport, we endorse Webb's words.

[news.com.au]

 

[pocodolce]

Teen model dumped

Teen model dumped
Updated: 23:47, Friday April 11, 2008

A 14-year-old Polish girl has been dumped from Australian Fashion Week, after organisers bowed to public pressure to adopt a minimum age of 16 for its models.

The controversial decision to feature 14-year-old Monika Jagaciak in the major Sydney fashion event was reversed 'in light of industry and community concern regarding the acceptable age for models'.

It is understood a chain reaction of events spurred the decision, beginning with Vogue Australia's decision to pull the provocative youngster from the cover of its magazine.
'I was under the impression that she was 16 or 17,' said Vogue Australia editor, Kirsty Clements.

'It was only a couple of days ago that I found out she was 14, which is when I pulled the plug.'

The event organisers eventually backed down in the face of mounting public concern.

'Effective immediately, both male and female models participating in Rosemount Australian Fashion Week will need to be at least 16 years of age and must be represented by a model agency,' Australian Fashion Week management said in a statement.

Yet not everyone agrees with the decision, with well-known fashion writer Patty Huntington believing it to be a case of moral panic and double-standards.

'It's a contentious issue because some people think that 14-year-olds shouldn't be modelling, but by the same token you may as well say 14-year-old shouldn't be acting either and there are plenty of child actors,' Ms Huntington said.

NSW Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said the young model's involvement was 'simply unacceptable'.

'The fashion industry made it clear that no models should be employed under 16 and that's where it ought to end,' Mr O'Farrell said.

'Those who employed a 14-year-old have a lot to answer at a time when particularly young girls are under enormous stress in relation to body image.'

[SkyNews.com.au]

 

[*Bianca*]

Where is that bathing suit pic from, anyway? Which mag? Do we know?

 

[Cut Copy]

im sick of Australian fashion week. they will do anything to get into the headlines. the guy who runs that is a real jerk.

 

[Faith Akiyama]

Holy cow, so much press coverage...but I guess it's warranted.

 

[*Bianca*]

CC, yes, it does seem like a publicity stunt.

Why would they send that particular pic out of all pics??

 

[Paws]

This is all so very interesting.

 

[samanthay]

Wow it seems over all of this that there are a lot of guests visiting Jac's thread I'm suprised at how much publicity there is over all of this.

 

[xmodel citizen]

I don't care how hypocritical they're being, I still don't think she should be working, honestly. That one bathing suit pic of her lying in a shower disturbed me like no other and I was shocked when no one else in this thread seemed to care. I don't particularly care to see half-dressed 13 year olds.

 

[Paws]

I don't care how hypocritical they're being, I still don't think she should be working, honestly. That one bathing suit pic of her lying in a shower disturbed me like no other and I was shocked when no one else in this thread seemed to care. I don't particularly care to see half-dressed 13 year olds.

Yes I remember when you posted your concerns about that.
I didn't reply because I did post my views once regarding a similar pic of Pamela Bernier on her thread and I was told by the mod to take my views/dicussion to this thread

http://www.thefashionspot.com/forums/f96/model-s-age-when-start-how-young-too-young-20586.html

But I wish I had commented now because if you are on a thread about a certain model and they are underage/or young.....I think it is a pertinent discussion.....in their thread and in the above listed thread.

I did shy away from it and I am sorry.

NO, it is not appropriate. At her age, there are so many other types of pics that can be taken of her!!!

 

[*Bianca*]

Yeah, I do think that age should be allowed to be discussed in the particular model's thread instead of having to take it else where.

 

[Mr-Dale]

^I agree Bianca....her age is a very important part of her career atm so therefore it's perfectly appropriate to discuss here. Personally I think that 15 should be sort of a limit, but I think it's very hypocritical that they are now suddenly banning all girls under 16 because they were outraged over Jac's young age. I mean all the examples have been mentioned already...Katie, Gemma, Tallulah...is it because Jac's not an Aussie? I wonder if this will affect her future career? She is still a great promiss for the future, but still...Is bad publicity really bad, or is any publicity good publicity?

 

[Cut Copy]

what they've done is created publicity for themselves at the expense of a young girl.

shame on AFW.

 

[*Bianca*]

It seems incredibly senseless when they have girls such as Rianne and other international models flying out, to want to use Monika to headline the event when she's barely done any work - print work, yes, but shes only done a handful of runway...none which have been in the major fashion capitals.

Mr-Dale, I really hope this doesn't affect her future career. I'm surprised IMG allowed this to happen.

 

[*Bianca*]

Where is that bathing suit pic from, anyway? Which mag? Do we know?

I found it.

It's from L'Officiel, and it's not photographed by Meisel as some new reports are saying, it's photographed by Chuando & Frey, and styled by Brenda Tham.

It's in the Beauty section, accompanying a Valentine's Day-centric story called Great Escapes, about the best spas.

Very age inappropriate, but hopefully from all this they will make much better decisions as to what editorials Monika books in the future.

 

[1FashionVictim]

I just read about her in the Daily Mail. I felt really bad for her missing out on shooting a Vogue Australia cover.

 

[Dona]

^ Me too...

 

[-MR.D-]

I found it.

It's from L'Officiel, and it's not photographed by Meisel as some new reports are saying, it's photographed by Chuando & Frey, and styled by Brenda Tham.

It's in the Beauty section, accompanying a Valentine's Day-centric story called Great Escapes, about the best spas.

Very age inappropriate, but hopefully from all this they will make much better decisions as to what editorials Monika books in the future.

This picture?

yenmag

(Sorry if it has been posted before)

 

[*Bianca*]

Yes that picture.