I give a wide berth to artists but those teddy bears are not innocuous. They are highly suggestive and in the context of the photo shoot are beyond the pale. In my opinion BDSM teddy bears alone is a bright red flag.

So because you give a wide berth to artists and I assume high art in general... I'm sorry but your opinion is invalidated.

It's invalidated in the same way if some rube off the street told you that they give a wide berth to applied research and then went on to give some sort of opinion about workplace solutions and then summed it all up by saying some one particular thing was a red flag to them.

Rubes are entitled to their opinions as am I.

It’s teddy bears in chains. I mean I know I’m French which means it’s probably hard to find someone culturally less attuned with an American regarding sexuality but the whole thing seems to me like a storm in a tea cup. As I said, it’s not tasteful but that’s miles away from being scandalous.

If only it were a storm in a teacup! This will be used for political gain among America's christo-nationalist right wing.

Watch the rest of the video. Eventually the actors are all walking around wearing child carriers containing dolls.

What's so unsettling about that? Sure, I understand they did this to cause a bit of a stir, but it's just people carrying around dolls in a dystopian setting.

And even if there were actual babies in there, the most unsettling part is the danger of the person carrying the baby slipping in the mud and falling on top of the baby.

I don't think I can explain to you why this is unsettling in the same way I can't explain why abusing animals is bad, stealing is bad, or anything else is "bad". If we don't already have a shared system of morals which says "abuse of children is bad", then it seems unlikely I'm going to convince you that depictions of child abuse are bad.

To me, this is "bad" because I subscribe to a belief system that thinks abusing children is bad. Balenciaga, in their marketing, has used images which imply the abuse of children. Therefore: this is bad.

Well done on implying someone not agreeing with you on the moral value of carrying dolls in a fashion show is actually them not caring about child abuse and having a poor moral system.

Please at least try to argue in good faith. It’s the first time I think I should flag a comment looking polite at face value.

>Well done on implying someone not agreeing with you on the moral value of carrying dolls in a fashion show

This is not fair. The original post was about the inappropriate use of children in a marketing campaign. Balenciaga claims they didn't know the nature of the photoshoot.

The video I linked provides context demonstrating that balenciaga continued the same theme in their fashion show. "Why is this fashion show bad" "because it is part of a larged set of behaviors which include and encourage child abuse".

You can disagree with me, but don't misstate what I am saying.

Your slippery slope logical fallacies has no merit. There were no children being abused in the Balenciaga video you posted.

>These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons This would imply you believe in demons, which are things that do not exist in the real world. You might believe they exist due to your moral upbringing but just because you were brainwashed (abused) as a child, doesnt mean every one is a child abuser.

Lotta Volkova artwork is definitely sordid but so is a lot of art. You dont have to like it or even look.

If anyone abuses a child, partner or elder, they should be held accountable.

Let me know when there's a wiki list full child abuse incidents involving Drag shows while most godfearing people ignore institutional abuse and rape in the Church

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_c...

> Lotta Volkova artwork is definitely sordid but so is a lot of art. You don't have to like it or even look.

Exactly. I feel like art and its purpose have been lost in recent years. Art is supposed to make people think or feel. Paintings of beheadings in museums don't make people think about beheading people, nor do they make people happy. They make people think about the atrociousness of history and hopefully about not wanting to repeat it.

My (non religious) dad recently argued that music that implies rape or child abuse shouldn't be broadcast on the radio, because it's wrong. I asked whether any movie showing violence, abuse and rape should also not be played on TV or in cinema. I also explained that both are art forms and aren't depictions of things the singers or actors want to do in real life, per se (we all know there are exceptions). He argued this, however, because he heard the argument from some radio DJs.

It'll be a sad day when we ban everything we don't like to see or hear, because that's when we forget those things exist and stop doing anything against it.

But this is pointedly not child abuse. You're talking about inanimate objects.

Can one abuse a urinal? (Apologies to marcel duchamp!)

Can you timestamp this? I clicked around (not really desiring to watch 15 minutes tbh) and all I saw was people carrying what looks like a stuffed animal (think like a teddy bear for a child) as a purse with a leather strap and people in otherwise skinny dresses and the like walking in mud. Even the final statement piece just looked like your average avant guard edgy nonsense, straps and belts that made no sense draping someone unflatteringly so the model had to walk super slow.

Won't somebody think of...

...the dolls???

It's still not that unsettling as the parent comment tried to portray it.

I'm actually not sure what caused such a repulse from that comment, it's the usual edgy haute couture show, the way it was described in that comment made me expect a lot more than what I watched. I thought there would be some deeply unsettling stuff and was wondering how it was even allowed on a fashion show. It's just mud, some models walking around with the pieces of the season and... That's it?

The chained BDSM teddy bears with the kids pictures are actually in bad taste and more unsettling than the show but in a "how the fuck did the artistic directors think this would be viewed as?" way than anything else. Because it's truly in bad taste to try to refer to any kind of child abuse.

To me the shock portrayed by the parent comment of yours is actually a bit shocking, might be that my life's experiences made me a bit unfazed to this forced edgy bit though.