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

71–80 of 166 posts

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#71

Post by PuppyTailWags »

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...

NGL, most of it just looks kinda innocuously edgy and made for shock value. For all we know she's had like 1 edgy photo out of 100 normal ones and then someone just collated the creepiest ones? Do we know the context of any of these?

[Edited to add: I don't know any of these people, fashion, or anything. I'm however extremely skeptical of conspiracy theory talk, poorly-contextualized information, and so need way more than context-free photos allegedly from an instagram page.]

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#72

Post by ulfbert_inc »

navjack27 wrote: post #46
no-dr-onboard wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose the other thing to consider is the (art book in the photos) by an author who regularly depicts children naked, dismembered, and covered in blood. Please stop engineering doubt. It's absurd to pretend that there isn't a consistent theme of child abuse here. Not a claim on OP, but in general for this conversation: I find it intriguing that the level of grace and benefit that is given to the people involved in…

The theme is child abuse... Except not in the way that you're thinking about it... It's speaking out against it by showing the extreme depiction of it in a controlled art manner.

Art is meant to be beautiful, not to crush human spirit.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#73

Post by Loughla »

KrugerDunnings wrote: post #14
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 paper…

>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.

There is absolutely zero chance that any choice associated with a professional photo shoot was made flippantly, especially for fashion of any kind. Every hair, every spec of dirt, and every single thing in every single shot is intentional.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#74

Post by thepasswordis »

donkeyd wrote: post #49
thepasswordis wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#75

Post by vorpalhex »

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.…

None of this was upsetting. This sort of seems like the "why can't comedians only tell nice jokes?"

Fashion is an art form. Sometimes it makes statements and attempts at subversion.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#76

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #38
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. It’s very unsettling. No offense but that’s just a fashion show in a setting involving some mud in the background. It looks a bit like another planet rather than hell. Also there are no children here. I’m still looking for the disturbing part.…

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.

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.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#77

Post by onetimeusename »

p0pcult wrote: post #16

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.

I am in favor of free speech. However, I can't help but think the mainstream internet activist left and right are engaged in a trolling war.

This art is probably intended to be edgy, just like the faux-satanism fashion, it's meant to rub freedom of expression in the faces of certain people the in-crowd dislikes. All that is happening is mutual provocation and outrage. The same thing is happening on Twitter with performative trolling and then people claiming that Twitter is now a threat to democracy. Obviously, that means a lot of people who claim to want free speech only want it for themselves.

This particular speech that I don't like is a threat to society

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#78

Post by piva00 »

thepasswordis wrote: post #41
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. It’s very unsettling. No offense but that’s just a fashion show in a setting involving some mud in the background. It looks a bit like another planet rather than hell. Also there are no children here. I’m still looking for the disturbing part.…

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

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#79

Post by dsfyu404ed »

navjack27 wrote: post #43

To everyone commenting on this using the phrases: Seems bizarre Is bizarre Disturbing Seems concerning Fishy If someone shows you who they are believe them Shame Disgusting Literal demons Very unsettling Congratulations! You took the bait! Now you are participating in something called moral outrage. All you are doing is exactly what they want you to do. They being Balenciaga. You are free marketing.

Pretty much all high fashion is bizarre by the standards of average people who don't deal in it.

Grouping people who call it that in with people going whole hog on the moral panic serves no productive purpose other than to lend legitimacy to the moral panic.

You will eventually reap what you sow with this "everyone who has a criticism is an extremist" rhetoric.

Re: The Balenciaga Controversy

#80

Post by _fat_santa »

SilverBirch wrote: post #37

Controversy is what it is. Firstly, it's high fashion - they're always courting controversy, but secondly, what exactly do people think is happening when they see some ruling about child porn in a photoshoot? I'm sure Tucker Carlson will run and run with this (and unfortunately there are unhinged people who genuinely think there's a pedo sex cult around every corner), but this is just your bargain basement shock chas…

Even if they were shock chasing, it's just a really fucked up thing to do (and those are the mildest terms I can put it in). There are plenty of ads I see where I go "well they took it a little far but I can understand what they are trying to do". Making references to CP in photoshoot with children going many many many steps beyond just "shock chasing".
Post reply on HN