Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Balenciaga Controversy

glossy.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 166 posts

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#11

Post by claudiawerner »

rabite wrote: post #8
claudiawerner wrote: post #5

>One of them seems to show, albeit in an obscured way, text from a Supreme Court decision related to the PROTECT Act, a 2003 federal law that states child pornography is not protected by free speech. This is not the whole truth; it's an excerpt from Ashcroft vs Free Speech Coalition, which was a case in which it was decided that fictional depictions of minors that don't exist nude or engaged in sexual acts is protect…

You're leaving out all the photos on Lotta Volkova's Instagram. These are not a "nothingburger" it is obviously the product of a sick mind that likes to imply the sexual suffering and physical injury of children. https://nitter.net/jakeshieldsajj/status/1597051525830152192...

My comment was only in reference to the photoshoot set containing the document or the 'BDSM bear'; my point is that these alone feed into an outrage machine that goes nowhere.

As for Volkova, I don't know enough to judge, but you might be right, I don't know; but it's a separate issue, in which there may be more under the cover than the usual insinuation and conspiracy thinking.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#12

Post by ren_engineer »

thepasswordis wrote: post #3

Here’s Balenciaga’s 2023 video showing off their styles for the year. This is from their own YouTube channel. Fair warning: the children shown appear to be dolls, not actual human children, but it is still disturbing: https://youtu.be/Yh_1K9s6UV0 These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons (one of them has horns on their head) many of whom are carrying (probably fake) children, and all marching through the mud.…

in a post Epstein world none of these companies deserve benefit of the doubt in these types of situations. Once people dug into it they found Balenciaga has been doing similar things for years, you have to wonder why their marketing team would think this stuff appeals to their extremely rich and powerful customers

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#13

Post by chrischen »

rabite wrote: post #8
claudiawerner wrote: post #5

>One of them seems to show, albeit in an obscured way, text from a Supreme Court decision related to the PROTECT Act, a 2003 federal law that states child pornography is not protected by free speech. This is not the whole truth; it's an excerpt from Ashcroft vs Free Speech Coalition, which was a case in which it was decided that fictional depictions of minors that don't exist nude or engaged in sexual acts is protect…

You're leaving out all the photos on Lotta Volkova's Instagram. These are not a "nothingburger" it is obviously the product of a sick mind that likes to imply the sexual suffering and physical injury of children. https://nitter.net/jakeshieldsajj/status/1597051525830152192...

The fact that Lotta Volkova is not even mentioned in this "Explained" article and the fact that a lot of misinformation is being thrown around (people trying to blame the photographer) just goes to show how much fake controversy is potentially being drummed up here.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#14

Post by KrugerDunnings »

thepasswordis wrote: post #3

Here’s Balenciaga’s 2023 video showing off their styles for the year. This is from their own YouTube channel. Fair warning: the children shown appear to be dolls, not actual human children, but it is still disturbing: https://youtu.be/Yh_1K9s6UV0 These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons (one of them has horns on their head) many of whom are carrying (probably fake) children, and all marching through the mud.…

I thought that fashion show was great, the empty pit of mud is just hysterical, it is a bit of a shock act. The hole thing just seems like an inside joke that some people took too serious. This is a common problem with communicating things ironically, someone is bound to not get it. Dunno what happened with the photo shoot but probably the director was like put some paper on the table, and someone was like what papers, supreme court document, find some on the internet, I found a ruling about free speech and child porn, Ok great. You may say this is a stupid thing but then the highest court in the country decided to spend its time on the important legal distinction between child porn and free speech. Like that are very serious grown people spending their time on that. Fashion is stupid but at least is obvious to everyone and everyone but the biggest autist know everyone knows.

Also I don't see the difference between the work by Lotta Volkova and some drawings by Goya.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#15

Post by p0pcult »

ren_engineer wrote: post #12
thepasswordis wrote: post #3

Here’s Balenciaga’s 2023 video showing off their styles for the year. This is from their own YouTube channel. Fair warning: the children shown appear to be dolls, not actual human children, but it is still disturbing: https://youtu.be/Yh_1K9s6UV0 These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons (one of them has horns on their head) many of whom are carrying (probably fake) children, and all marching through the mud.…

in a post Epstein world none of these companies deserve benefit of the doubt in these types of situations. Once people dug into it they found Balenciaga has been doing similar things for years, you have to wonder why their marketing team would think this stuff appeals to their extremely rich and powerful customers

In a society with rule of law, everyone deserves benefit of the doubt, always, until proven otherwise.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#16

Post by p0pcult »

Until there is actual evidence of actual pedophilia, this is just a retread of the 1980s satanic panic, being capitalized upon by the global fascist hard right, but this time conflating pedophilia with homosexuality and transsexuality.

Is it tasteless? De gustibus non est disputandum. So much high fashion is stupid and provocative, imo.

Is it pedophilia? No.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#17

Post by ren_engineer »

p0pcult wrote: post #15
ren_engineer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in a post Epstein world none of these companies deserve benefit of the doubt in these types of situations. Once people dug into it they found Balenciaga has been doing similar things for years, you have to wonder why their marketing team would think this stuff appeals to their extremely rich and powerful customers

In a society with rule of law, everyone deserves benefit of the doubt, always, until proven otherwise.

Balenciaga isn't facing any criminal charges, I'm talking about public opinion. If somebody shows you who they are, believe them.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#18

Post by syrrim »

thepasswordis wrote: post #3

Here’s Balenciaga’s 2023 video showing off their styles for the year. This is from their own YouTube channel. Fair warning: the children shown appear to be dolls, not actual human children, but it is still disturbing: https://youtu.be/Yh_1K9s6UV0 These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons (one of them has horns on their head) many of whom are carrying (probably fake) children, and all marching through the mud.…

They filed a lawsuit claiming they didn't know about a single stray sheet of paper in one of the photos of the shoot, which looks entirely innocent on first inspection, but happens to be a court document for a famous child pornography suit. The existence of this document has been claimed by some observers (shoe, for one), to be the "smoking gun" proving that this is all satan worship rather than strange art. So it is perfectly reasonable for balenciaga to assert that they didn't know about this document, and a great deal hinges on this seemingly minor question.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#19

Post by p0pcult »

syrrim wrote: post #18
thepasswordis wrote: post #3

Here’s Balenciaga’s 2023 video showing off their styles for the year. This is from their own YouTube channel. Fair warning: the children shown appear to be dolls, not actual human children, but it is still disturbing: https://youtu.be/Yh_1K9s6UV0 These seem to be adults dressed as literal demons (one of them has horns on their head) many of whom are carrying (probably fake) children, and all marching through the mud.…

They filed a lawsuit claiming they didn't know about a single stray sheet of paper in one of the photos of the shoot, which looks entirely innocent on first inspection, but happens to be a court document for a famous child pornography suit. The existence of this document has been claimed by some observers (shoe, for one), to be the "smoking gun" proving that this is all satan worship rather than strange art. So it is…

Nothing hinges on this question; nothing illegal was done. You're being trolled by both Balenciaga and the Twittersphere.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#20

Post by mantas »

p0pcult wrote: post #15
ren_engineer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in a post Epstein world none of these companies deserve benefit of the doubt in these types of situations. Once people dug into it they found Balenciaga has been doing similar things for years, you have to wonder why their marketing team would think this stuff appeals to their extremely rich and powerful customers

In a society with rule of law, everyone deserves benefit of the doubt, always, until proven otherwise.

Do we have rule of law though?

E.g. certain Russian oligarchs winning lawsuits in West because of some legalese. It feels like „rule of law“ nowadays is used to silence the weak and doesn't apply to the powerful ones.

Post reply on HN