Deconstructing Tom Ford’s Cadeaux editorial in Vogue Paris
The images of Tom Ford’s controversial, probably-had-something-to-do-with-Carine-Roitfeld’s-resignation fashion editorial in the December-January edition of Vogue Paris, featuring tiny children in heavy makeup and a truckload of couture, are out.
Some have expressed outrage, while some have expressed delight over the creativity and styling of the spreads. We deconstruct the possible reasons that this is being generally thought of as a bad thing, and imagine a rebuttal of every negative assertion pertaining to the fashion editorial.
“And you can witness their innocence fading away right before your eyes,” say conservatives.
Vogue Paris seems to be broadening its target audience to include middle-aged pedophiles. Why else would they use kids to attract readers?
Because it’s fun and a nice change of scenery from all the skinny models who are similarly underage like these little kids. Why is it okay to have a 15-year-old (Dutch model Daphne Groeneveld on the cover) pose provocatively but not acceptable to have a six-year-old dress up and act playfully (not including that one photo with the girl in a red ruffled dress)? They’re both minors, right? So why just attack this editorial?
What would children think of themselves when they see girls in outrageous makeup? This would send them the message that their natural beauty isn’t good enough for society, even as six-year-olds. Then they’d throw tantrums at the beauty counter to coerce their mothers into getting them some blue eyeshadow.
A normal girl would initially say, that looks like fun! And then she’ll try putting on her mother’s makeup and realize how silly it looks on her. And then she’ll get over the whole makeup is beauty thing. You know how short kids’ attention spans are these days.
These images will corrupt their innocence and encourage them to worry about shallow things, like dresses and accessories and nail polish.
Innocence is all about obsessing with mundane, shallow things, like little dresses, little macaroni necklaces and little pretend tea parties on Mrs. van de Kamp’s lawn. Since when did we expect children to start figuring out the nitty-gritty of global political affairs? And why else would we all want to be oblivious little kids again every now and then?
Making children wear fur makes them think that donning dead animals for fun is as normal as hunting unicorns and leprechauns at the end of the rainbow.
The whole world has been at odds with this issue for so long, but nothing has been resolved. Is it or is it not acceptable to wear fur? Is synthesizing faux fur better for all than farming adorable chinchillas for their shiny coats? It’s all been a barrage of propagandistic arguments from either side of the fence and until some International Fashion Court rules that it’s illegal to wear fur, most moderate consumers will continue siding with yes, fur is fine.
They are sexualizing the children by dressing them up as grown women.
Say what? When did makeup equate to sexuality? And when was being a grown woman ever exclusively about sexuality? Sexual maturity is just one of the many aspects of becoming a responsible grown-up, and the fact that some people still mistake it for adulthood and the many joys, challenges and complexities it entails is a little disturbing to say the least.
Such comment completely undermines what the feminist movement has been working to achieve since the beginning of the 18th century. It’s like saying, “Hey, you were brought into this world so you can spend all those years developing (physically) into an adult female, so you can wear makeup and seduce the heck out of the male species. But right now you’re too young for that.”