Is it okay to buy/wear Balenciaga given the controversy related to children? They have apologized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

How about you all do some reading:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/style/balenciaga-campaign-controversy.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:of course it is. They were misguided "art" pictures. They didn't DO anything to children.

Buy what you want.

Nope. It is very sick to use children in that way. Using children is doing something to them and putting images that are disturbing with their faces.

I agree with this. I’m honestly usually pretty pro art and not easily scandalized by controversial images. I do believe these images are intended to sexualize children which is vile

Yeah I am pretty grossed out by them. I don't have the budget for Balenciaga so it's a non-issue for me, whether I'd wear them or not. Kanye was one of their celebrity faces and they took a while to dump him after his most recent anti-semitic rants, so factor that in, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

A child cannot consent to participation in sexual acts even if their parent is present.

I don’t see this as an issue of prudishness or discomfort with sexuality. This was made with the intention of associating children with a sexual fetish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

A child cannot consent to participation in sexual acts even if their parent is present.

I don’t see this as an issue of prudishness or discomfort with sexuality. This was made with the intention of associating children with a sexual fetish.

I+1 It was intentional by someone(s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

What to you mean to say is that the mentality of European wealthy men who are members of the intelligentsia is different. And yes, that is true. There is a reason Roman Polanski, rapist of a 13-year-old, fled to Europe and was welcomed there.

But the sexual abuse victims of these men are now fighting back. European women finally have enough wealth and independence that they don’t need to accept what these men have been telling them. And this is changing things in Europe. There is a lot of discussion about this (NYT just did an article about France in particular about a year ago).

In short, no, sexualized imagery of children is not just met with a shoulder shrug in all of Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

What to you mean to say is that the mentality of European wealthy men who are members of the intelligentsia is different. And yes, that is true. There is a reason Roman Polanski, rapist of a 13-year-old, fled to Europe and was welcomed there.

But the sexual abuse victims of these men are now fighting back. European women finally have enough wealth and independence that they don’t need to accept what these men have been telling them. And this is changing things in Europe. There is a lot of discussion about this (NYT just did an article about France in particular about a year ago).

In short, no, sexualized imagery of children is not just met with a shoulder shrug in all of Europe.

+1 thank you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

I’m not patriotic but if being American means being opposed to a company using references to pedophilia for profit then 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🎇🎇🎇🏈🏈🏈

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

I’m not patriotic but if being American means being opposed to a company using references to pedophilia for profit then 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🎇🎇🎇🏈🏈🏈

(But I’ll add that I think it’s totally wrong that being opposed to this is a prudish American thing)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

I’m not patriotic but if being American means being opposed to a company using references to pedophilia for profit then 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🎇🎇🎇🏈🏈🏈

(But I’ll add that I think it’s totally wrong that being opposed to this is a prudish American thing)

It’s not. There are many Europeans who are horrified by this as well.

[Anonymous]

Put the Balenciaga stuff in storage. Buy something else. Plenty of brands out there providing fab stuff without always having to 'push the envelope" to extremes.

[Anonymous]

Calvin Klein got in trouble for something like this in the 90s or early 200s. A creepy ad..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t. It’s like saying I support sexual exploitation of children. I’m sorry, but their apology was BS and there is a pattern here. The Ashcroft decision appearing in their ads as a “wink wink” combined with the horrific teddy bear ads is just too much for me. I feel gross even touching my stuff from them now.

+10000

+1 sick people with disturbed minds using children

What did they do to the children? I'm confused...

They shared images of children with sexual imagery. Sexual assault of a person can be a picture and these kids are not able to consent.

But those kids have parents, right? Where are those parents?

European mentality is so different than American. Everything here is all about being "politically correct". Get real people!

I’m not patriotic but if being American means being opposed to a company using references to pedophilia for profit then 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🎇🎇🎇🏈🏈🏈

(But I’ll add that I think it’s totally wrong that being opposed to this is a prudish American thing)

It’s not. There are many Europeans who are horrified by this as well.

That’s what I was trying to say. I should have said “inaccurate” instead of wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Calvin Klein got in trouble for something like this in the 90s or early 200s. A creepy ad..

That ad you are thinking of was indeed creepy but it featured young people who appeared to be in their late teens. This ad with kindergarten-age kids is an entirely new level of degeneracy.