It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sick Society sexualizes a ten year old girl

page: 7
15
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by SirClem
Vogue promotes pedophilia
Vogue soft porn link

This is an innocent child, exploited for profit. But, the exploitation runs much deeper than the child here, this is an abuse of our creative right to express ourselves. I pity the artist that has to stoop so low.
One of the photographs is clearly framed to put curves on a ten year old girl for clearly sexual provocation. This is child porn.
NO, I don't believe the government should step in. I think that true artists should turn their back on whomever is even remotely related to this.
If this is "in vogue", I am an outsider to this sick societ



Eh this is discusting. Not only that but we also have 8 year old boys dressing up as girls. Seriously? That kid needs to talk to a counsler asap! What's wrong with parents now a days? Its too young for sexuality like that




posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Today whilst coming out of the chemists I saw the very reason why I think its tragic to mar the boundary between childhood and adulthood as above.

A little girl about 11ish stomped past me. I noticed her for one reason only initially, she was so terribly thin. Anorexic thin. Her face had make up on but not plastered. I went to cross the road and caught a glimse of her retreating figure. She was wearing quite high heels.

There was no doubt she was a kid, not a teen because of her height and stature. She seemed to have crossed the boundary of innocent, unadulterated childhood and that was what upset me because she should (hopefully) have had no responsibilities to worry about except to enjoy her childhood.

I know many kiddies have horrendous home lifes but this being caterpulted into adulthood is a different pressure that kids can even put themselves under when seeing pictures of other kiddies like Brook above. Brook only looks so sophisticated a beauty. because of make up, lighting, surroundings, clothes etc. With today's ghastly shallow celebrity so popular with murdoch and buddies, little girls hear about the incredible earnings for the likes of Kate Moss and with a flair for today's totally unfounded shallow sophistication, a number of them will try to leap to the bandwagon. An understanding that beauty is only skin deep and even though Sharon Osborne seems to suit the surgeon's knife, its such a tiny part of life its tragic it attracts so many and mostly breaks their hearts one way or another.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I totally agree, sick #s. That should be illegal.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirClem
reply to post by Logman
 

Wrong Logman.
Someone frames these photographs. The child does not pick the poses.
Someone dresses the model. The child does not pick the outfits. Even IF the child does pick the outfits, doesn't this say something about the culture he/she was raised in?
A society is judged by its character, and its standards. If this is cool, we have no standards.


I'm only on page 1 of this thread, so if someone else has already pointed this out, sorry for the redundancy.

This little girl's mother is a fashion designer in France, I think. She is modeling her mother's designs. It doesn't change the level of exploitation, but her mother is on set for these "poses."

I saw this on "The View" and other news oulets are also "all over it."

edit on 5-8-2011 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirClem
Vogue promotes pedophilia

Vogue soft porn link


You have no idea what "soft porn" is, do you?

Its the same pictures of some girl dressed up to look glamorous, or regal (they've been posted here before).

Soft porn...lol.
edit on 8/5/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Kitilani
 



Some little girl puts on some makeup and a gold dress and suddenly everyone on ATS should parent this little girl because her parents are not doing the job some ATSers wish they were.


That's the problem everywhere.

The nanny state has done an extremely good job of instilling into us, the values of annoyingly-nosy neighbors.

Even if we gained our liberty back, people's heads would explode if someone parented their children differently from themselves. Then the masses would start screaming for more "protection" and "security" for children, instead of just worrying about their own damn kids. Leading us all the way back to fascism.
edit on 8/5/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/5/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Seriously, if anyones is provoked by thoses pictures, or view thems as something sexual,then it mean you have a serious problem.

I dont see anything sexual in thoses pictures,sorry guys, if you find the pictures disturbing or arousing.....you need serious help.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
sick sick world.
edit on 5-8-2011 by sicksonezer0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirClem


This is an innocent child, exploited for profit. .




Its not just about profit.
This is a part of Cultural Marxism, which is designed to destroy the family,
then the individual, so as to a create a new Marxist Individual loyal to Marxism.
A New Utopia were nothing has any meaning;sex,culture,race,religion,family,
country,class, and everything is equal to everything else. Perfect equality.
Sex is for everyone, not just adults then.
Sex for adults is sexist. Pedophilia is child liberation.

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 5-8-2011 by RRokkyy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by SirClem
 





posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SirClem
 



edit on 8/5/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Logman
 


Well said, Freud would have a hay day indeed.
Do I agree that this 10 year old girl should be doing this? Not really, but I still stand rather neutral on the subject.
I was watching one of those pageant TV shows the other day (I hadn't changed the channel from a previous show so it was just on) and although the parents were really REALLY into it the girls seemed just as passionate about being the Little Miss Whatever so it's something they do want. That said it does seem like the moms are just trying to take the glory or live through their daughters success vicariously.
To me I just see a 10 year old girl dressed up for a photo shoot, nothing sexual, but can understand the interpretation as such.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Is the reason why we see despcicable sexualisation here because society has been sexualised soo much that we see sex in everything?

Just my two cents.
edit on 5-8-2011 by EvanB because: just trying to get used to this ats lark



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
>Vogue
>Child model
>It's child porn

Never change ATS.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
I think most of you are way off reason and logic, let me say this, its YOU who sexualized a ten year old girl, not a magazine not some clothes but your mind, its you who are sick, I see nothing sexual in a pretty girl on a magazine cover, the same in movies, etc, so what if she is dressed as an adult, the world has radically changed in many aspect to far worse, but this is the tip of an iceberg.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Well, I don't know if there are any other pictures than what was on the link, but I must say, what a huge overreaction! This isn't even close to soft porn. I guess when little girls try on their mothers makeup and dress up, that's soft porn too, huh? As others have said, I think the only sexualization is going on in the minds who find something dirty about this.

edit on 5-8-2011 by Balkan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousVan
 

I find them disturbing, not arousing,
Big difference there and it's very offensive you would accuse anyone of being a pervert because they recognize the sexuality in them.
There is another photo of her half naked with neclaces strategically placed.
If you deny the sexual nature is not evident in that, there is something wrong with you my dear!
Get some help yourself!


EDIT: search in google images for Thylane Loubry Blondeau, you can find it there.

edit on 5-8-2011 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stovokor
Yup looks like kiddie porn to me. That's not right on many levels. If a person had a bunch of pics like this on their computer that they took of a child..they would be considered a kiddie fiddler...why is this an exception? Because a so-called 'artist' took them?


I downloaded all of the pics from the OP's link.

If, by your logic, a fully-clothed child counts as "child porn." Then I have illegal contraband on my computer, and someone should alert the authorities.

I guarantee that I will not be arrested.

Why?

Because its not child porn.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
If you don't like it, don't look at it.

Simple as that.



posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousVan
 


Stop it! It doesn't mean any such thing. The girl is being sexualized, and it's very plain to see. Be honest with your feelings, and keep your head above the sand.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join