No, kids aren’t fashion accessories

Share the love

There’s a growing phenomenon in fashion: kids are more and more presented (or used) as a fashion accessory. The “cute” effect is now an excuse for any supposed consumers’ fantasy, mostly female, mostly egocentric and mostly superficial. It’s pretty worrying that fashion ads dive into this trend.

The last example we’ve spotted concerns Karen Walker lookbook for their eye-wear collection. The comment on Refinery29 demonstrates the whole problem:

Puppies and kittens have their charm, but Karen Walker’s latest lookbook is, hands down, the cutest thing you’ll see all day“.

After dogs that you hold in your bags in Harvey Nichols collection, you’ll soon be expected to wear a child as a modern jewel. Strange times.

“Everybody knows how to make babies; no one knows how to make fathers or mothers” (Stromaé)

What used to be a wonderful sexual emancipation and revolution (the right to have or help a kid) is broken by fashion and luxury brands. Transmission of values, the notion of growing together, the hope to achieve a better tomorrow, all that seem distorted by recent campaigns. Kids are fixed in a dead time zone: they are not considered as children but as a banner for our adult behaviors. Childhood is killed. But when we kill children, we also kill fathers and mothers.

Vogue

Is sex the only wonderworld of fashion and luxury?

Porn culture is starting to kill our communities. It’s apparently “cool” to distribute billions of images of penetration (sic). My point of view is that it’s not even shocking: it’s just creepy and wrong. Making porn normal is to accept that we are consumers without citizenship. In porn culture, the fringe between teens and adult is a key driver for masturbation retailer. But in an experiment led by Bryant Paul and Daniel G. Linz, sur the effects of exposure to virtual child pornography, conclusions are very clear: it impacts our cognitive system.

Fashion and luxury brands should not align to what’s cool but should create a new cool, more pervasive and not jeopardizing. When brands started to sell mini-skirts, there was a mean and a deep revolution. When they copy porn, they’re just random.

“Cute”, this dangerous buzzword

I am the first to use it all the time: in social networks, we tend to share, publish, everything that looks “cute”, moreover with children. There’s a regressive attitude among adults. What is very perverse is that if we’re insecure with growing old, we’re nonetheless ready to accept to watch and embed some Disney Porn (Miley Cyrus during MTV VMA is a good example) while on Facebook you cannot show any explicit tit even when you’re just suntanning at the beach. Where’s the moral at the end? Bringing children in our mind-game and make them meme our adult behaviors (seduction, glamor etc.) might be like putting cache-sexes on our vices. Unfair and dangerous.

Burberry, Mini Me campaign

We should get rid of Mini Me campaigns. My kid who’s not here yet, I hope he’ll don’t give a sh** on my fantasies. I do agree with a French child-psychiatrist, Serge Hefez:

To make up your daughter and buy her clothes as if she was a woman is criminal”

Fashion and luxury brands: inspire us of yourself, not the other way round.

 

One Response to “ No, kids aren’t fashion accessories ”

  1. […] recently wrote a post mentioning that kids aren’t fashion accessories.Where’s the right balance between teaching fashion and protecting […]

Leave a Reply

*
*