On the whole, French Vogue supplement Vogue Enfants is a gem for parents and children alike. It features cute clothes and accessories for kids (some that I wish were made for adults!) and this issue has a lovely interiors section that highlights four of the most perfectly precious designs for kids’ bedrooms (think Margot’s room in The Royal Tenenbaums).
But after reviewing the issue, Lauren, Leah and I all felt a little uncomfortable after looking at some of the images, both ads and editorials. Among the images in question are a little girl doing her best impression of a moody Freja in the Beauté section (another good question: a beauty section for toddlers? why?), and a tween model posing provocatively with her mouth agape. Maybe we don’t get it because of our Puritan mentality (Vogue Enfants is French after all but then again TLC puts out a popular show called Toddlers and Tiaras), or maybe it’s that seeing children modeling like they’re adults–adults who are supposed to be sexy–is just plain unsettling. The residual bad taste in our mouths may be leftover from the Vogue Paris December 2010 playfully perverse editorial featuring little girls in big-girl clothing and heaps of makeup.
What do you think, are these ads and editorials cute or creepy?
Tags: Vogue Enfants
Most Popular Stories
Comments [24]
Popular Stories
The 10 Best YouTube Hair Tutorials
The 10 Best YouTube Makeup Tutorials 
Fashion's Most Stylish Guys Give Mark Zuckerberg an (Almost!) Hoodie-Free Makeover for Facebook's IPO
Style and Substance: 10 Ladies Who Have Proven You Can Have Both
10 Beauty Boards You Should Be Following on Pinterest
Yes, you are right. Kids should not be shown posing seductively. They have plenty of time to lose their innocence. I am sure pedophiles will buy the mag in droves. And that Toddlers and Tiaras is ridiculous, too. Granted, this is French Vogue, so maybe it’s a French thing, i.e., art. But I am sure that in France there are laws against child porn, and this may be just grazing over it.
you are absolutely right. Sexualizing children is plain WRONG!
Todlers &Tiaras was NOT a french thing, sorry. It was a Tom Ford’s (disgusting) attempt to draw more attention to himself through provocation.We in Europe are totally disgusted with it.Carine can say the opposite but her point of view does not reflect our opinion. She can put her own daughter in porn if she wants to shock somebody.
Thank you, I’m sick of the exploitation and sexualization of children. People with limited imaginations resort to this crap.
by Todlers and Tiaras you meant the Vogue pictures, I guess..
you are absolutely right. Sexualizing children is plain WRONG!
Todlers &Tiaras was NOT a french thing, sorry. It was a Tom Ford’s (disgusting) attempt to draw more attention to himself through provocation.We in Europe are totally disgusted with it.Carine can say the opposite but her point of view does not reflect our opinion. She can put her own daughter in porn if she wants to shock somebody.
Arbonne makes great products for kids. Our ABC line of products are awesome. Feel free to check out my website, http://www.jamesstewart.myarbonne.com
We have products or the entire family. All of our products are free of mineral oil and are pure, safe and beneficial.
Many of these pictures (especially the tween with the open mouth) look odd and definitely make me uncomfortable. Even if the posses were not an attempt to be sexy (which is a generous assumption for some of these pictures), they are just not posses that a child can pull off. They look so unnatural. Kids should be cute and smiling!
I do like the little girl with the boat though.
But kids are often not cute and smiling. These pics don’t look sexualized to me, they look like kids being kids… which means being grumpy & bored
First of all,learn how to spell ! Posses?? And second if ANYONE looks at these pictures and it makes you “uncomfortable” or thinks that they are sexual.. I think YOU are the one with the sick mind!!! GET A LIFE PEOPLE!!!!!!
or perhaps the ones who are unable to see what IS PATENT, are the ones who will consume pedophilia later, because you know, they see it as a natural thing…
Some pictures displayed here clearly have a sexual hint… that little girl with her mouth slightly open for instance…
I think the only reason many of you may feel uncomfortable is because they’re not being portrayed as hyperactive cutesy-bubbly-smiley kids. Just because they look a little bit sassier and more serious doesn’t mean they’re being sexualized, nor is it in any way unnatural; in fact, I’d say it’s MORE relaxed and natural than the cheesy stereotypical American toddler. When I was a kid, I was a lot more like these kids than the ones on the boxes of Girl Scout Cookies, and I’ve got boxes of (completely non-sexy) photos to prove it.
As for the “Beauté” section- it features shampoos and lotions for toddlers, not eyeshadow or lip gloss. The latter, by the way, is being promoted to high heaven in American pre-teen magazines and drug stores, so if anyone is to start casting stones, it’s definitely not anyone from the society that gave the world children’s beauty pageants.
I agree completely. People are overreacting to this. How in the hell are they being sexualized? The girl with her mouth “agape” looks like she’s yawning. The girl in “Beaute” section looks like she’s pouting because she didn’t get her way. The ads are adorable. Two kids holding hands? What, no one’s ever seen that before?
And as for the statement that this is unnatural and the kids should be cute and smiling? I’ve spent enough time around children to know that they are not always “cute and smiling.” Quite the opposite, in fact. And I don’t know anyone who is “cute and smiling” in every picture of them as a child. THAT would be unnatural.
excuse me but anyone with a MINIMUN knowledge on fashion and photography know that a “semi open” mouth means the subject being photographed is offering or apt to receive sexual pleasure. I dont know how old are you or how long is your experience on the subject but a little research on the subject would bring light to your ignorance.
I have to agree with you. Sex is so permeated through publicity and fashion in so many subtle ways that most of people don’t even realize when they see it.
You mean MINIMUM, right? I’m an apparel merchandising major, and have plenty of knowledge of fashion and photography, thank you very much. Been following this industry for years. I understand what an open mouth is supposed to symbolize, I’m not a moron. I’m just saying that the photo doesn’t look sexual at all. She doesn’t look like she’s “receiving sexual pleasure”, she looks like she’s yawing. Thats all. So calm down with the arrogant attitude.
and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…
I beg to differ.Many of us feel who unconfortable is because we know some child who have been victim of abuse.No, its not UNNATURAL for kids to have some kind of sexuality( they normally play with their genitals or mouth) what IS UNNATURAL is to force those kids into adult stereotypes, feeding the fantasies of pederasts around.
I beg to differ.Many of us feel who unconfortable is because we know some child who have been victim of abuse.No, its not UNNATURAL for kids to have some kind of sexuality( they normally play with their genitals or mouth) what IS UNNATURAL is to force those kids into adult stereotypes, feeding the fantasies of pederasts around.
Oh Please! Not this again?
Do you have noting else to fill this page?
How old are you? Twenty something?
Look at the history of children in fashion magazines?
Let’s go back to Brooke Shields in the 70′s for example
Hot steamy load of _ _ _ _!
Big Yawn!
I was sickened when I saw the December issue of French Vogue, and this is no better. Children should remain children!!!
the majority of these comments are so middle of america its sickening. it blows my mind that in this country we have no problem showcasing extreme violence on television and exposing that to our children but the moment a magazine features children in some other scenario other than overly bubbly and happy every freaks the fuck out. what the majority of you dont understand is your playing right into what the editor of this magazine wants. you’re reacting. if you dont like what you see, close the magazine. no one’s forcing you to look at it. also, as a side not, theres a reason french people are inherently chic and as you can see from this magazine it starts at birth.
well, I am born and bread european…. and I dont agree with you.
Do you think that defending children for overexposure is just short minded/ american middle class?? You are very wrong.Besides, if there is a space where we can express ourselves, why do not use it?? why just “close the magazine”? WE pay for the magazines and we have rights on it. Editors can do whatever they want with adults BUT regarding children there must be limitsö
The simple fact is that if we accept this, we will be encouraging it. God forbid, children are held to such beauty standards of which the women of today have to contend with. Highly impressionable children should not be brought into such a superficial world. Let children by children. This is sick.
Definitely NOT sexy or creepy! More hysterical/ funny than anything. I do think that they asked the kids to mKe these faces, and remember this has to appeal to the parents, who are the ” buyers”, not the kids. I do think that the reaction stems from an overtly puritanical point of view. I’m American, married to a French guy living in Paris part time and these images are normal to me.